Dear candidates: How ’bout that Constitution, eh?
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
I guess this is "Constitution Week" at Polinaut, for it has already been an interesting week to look at questions of civil rights and government guarantee of rights, based on several court cases and news stories.
During the last campaign, I lamented on Polinaut that I really don't end up knowing very much about the candidates because the "issues" usually fall into several very general categories, and, besides, I don't know anything about them as people; only as politicians.
Iraq, taxes, abortion, guns, education are the usual issues that will be asked in the usual way and answered in the usual way. They're not unimportant, they just don't always lead to a revelation of the thought process.
I want to throw some hypotheticals at the candidates in the campaigns of '08 to see what they think about the reach and limits of government, and the rights we are afforded.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
A judge in New York has ordered a Web site to shut down because it sells materials that can help people legally stop paying taxes. Judge Thomas J. McAvoy wrote that "the First Amendment did (does) not protect the two organizations that operate the Web site... because it incites criminal conduct.
Oh, wait, it gets better. The judge ordered that the names, addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and Social Security numbers as well as e-mail addresses of all customers be turned over to the government.
Now, the debate here isn't whether people should or shouldn't pay their taxes, or even whether tax evasion is or isn't legal. The question is whether the Constitution protects you from, say, selling your opinion of those questions that could then be used to commit an illegal act.
The effect of this question, it seems to me far outweighs an analysis of some senator's "wide stance." I'd sure like to hear what the candidates think of the ruling, because I think it would yield some insight (as opposed to incite, a bad thing, I guess) into a fairly significant aspect of their service in office -- the Constitution, which I hear they're sworn to uphold, and protect, and defend. Perhaps we should add "define" to that.
Here's a question for the statewide candidates stemming from the work of the Legislature last spring. Do I, under the Constitution, have a right to sell an American flag that's not made in America?
I bet we'd learn a lot more from candidates if we pressed them on real-life constitutional questions. And since at least two of the folks running for U.S. Senate are attorneys, it shouldn't be too hard for 'em.
