I teach a class on Church and State in Comparative
Perspective and one of the options a student can choose to demonstrate her/his
learning is to become a teaching assistant.
The key role of that activity is to meet with me to discuss how the
class is progressing and to make suggestions about improving the course. The student who chose this option this
semester noted how important the Constitution to the United States was to many
of our discussions, especially the First and Fourteenth Amendments. She suggested that the first reading
assignment for the class might be to have every student read and discuss the
Constitution, something that most natural born citizens almost never do but
which immigrants who become citizens almost always do. In light of recent
statements coming from the Trump Administration leads me to think that perhaps
the same requirement should be made of all elected and appointed officials.
The comments made at C-PAC by Trump and members of his
cabinet leads me to recall a moment during the Presidential campaign when the
father of a deceased American Muslim soldier challenged the ban then candidate
Trump was proposing on Muslims entering the United States: “Donald Trump, you
are asking Americans to trust you with our future. Let me ask you: Have you
even read the United States constitution? I will gladly lend you my copy.” The answer to his question was not clear
then, nor is it today.
It is possible that Trump and his supporters have read parts
of the Constitution, the parts that they like, but not its entirety. Or perhaps, as many people are prone to do,
they cherry-pick those parts that serve their agenda. We don’t have to go beyond the First
Amendment to demonstrate what I mean.
Here's what Betsy DeVos said in her speech at C-PAC, after
asking how many in the audience were college students: "The fight against the education
establishment extends to you too. The faculty, from adjunct professors to
deans, tell you what to do, what to say, and more ominously, what to think.
They say that if you voted for Donald Trump, you’re a threat to the university
community. But the real threat is silencing the First Amendment rights of
people with whom you disagree."[i]
First Amendment rights!?!
Hmmn… I wonder if she has ever
read the entire first amendment. Here it
is:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
It seems rather convenient that
she focuses on one element of the first amendment: abridging the freedom of speech. Of course, I disagree with her basic premise. As a college professor I encourage all of my
students to share their views, whether I agree or not. But as an educator, I would be remiss in my
duties if I did not challenge ill-informed views and arguments; and that goes
for liberal as well as conservative perspectives.
And yet, to this date, the Trump
administration, including Betsy DeVos, have violated the other components of
the First Amendment at every turn. Her
own connection with “dominion theology” is well-documented, even stating that
her efforts on behalf of school choice is in part a desire “to confront the
culture in which we all live today in ways that will continue to help advance
God’s Kingdom.”[ii] The commitment to so-called “choice” in
public education has primarily served to funnel monies to Christian private
schools, which research has begun to demonstrate has left students less
educationally prepared than when they left public schools. So much for the notion that “Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
The same is true of the clause related to abridging the
freedom of the press. Whenever a story
runs counter to what the Administration wants or likes Trump calls their
reporting “fake” news and “lies” seeking to discredit them. His advisor, Steve Bannon, labels the press
as the “opposition party” in the hope that supporters will see them as
politically biased. Even Sean Spicer,
the President’s press secretary, got into the act by barring some news
organizations from press briefings.
Of course, the challenges to the First Amendment are not
limited to the Trump Administration.
Republican members of Congress are similarly raising issues with another
clause of the amendment. If people
attend their legislators’ town halls and voice displeasure with the policies
being enacted by this Republican administration and Congress, they label them
as activists and outsiders instead of affirming “the right of the people
peaceably to assemble” (unless, of course, it is 2010 and the Tea Party is
supporting their agenda).
While these attacks on the First Amendment provide great
fodder for my class discussions, they pose great concerns for those who care
about the freedoms espoused within. We
are on a dangerous precipice and it is not clear to me whether or not we will
back away from the edge or fall off the cliff.
In light of the continued efforts of millions of people and the
“mainstream” media to raise issues with this Administration and its cronies, I
am hopeful that not only will we refuse to be bullied but will restore these
freedoms to every person in this country regardless of race, creed, or
citizenship.
No comments:
Post a Comment