Jan 14^th

Today we have Dr. Thomas Sowell, an economist, trying his hand at constitutional law. His political blinders are securely in place so an unbiased view of the issues has been seriously obscured. He begins by claiming that “the political left has been especially vehement in its denunciations of what they call ‘messing with the constitution.’” The left has been hostile to Texas governor Greg Abbott’s proposal to hold a constitutional convention. I commented on Governor Abbott's singular positions on several issues just yesterday. To review briefly: Abbott is the Governor who activated the Texas National Guard when army maneuvers involving his state, and a number of other states in the south west, must have hit squarely on a paranoid concern of the governor’s that the federal government was going to invade Texas. As far as I know Texas was the only state to embarrass itself in this by activating its national guard.

But then there are the issues that Governor Abbott wants us to consider: foremost among these is no government interference with any matters occurring entirely within a state; a supermajority of seven SCOTUS members to overturn any state law: require a balanced budget; and other changes which would increase the state’s power to do as they please. (Perhaps re-instituting slavery?) Governor Abbott has had a history of wanting no federal interference with anything Texas wants to do even if it requires Texas seceding from the union. They now want their share of gold back from Fort Knox. If they do go their own way they’ll have pay for the 1200 mile border fence with Mexico. You might think Abbott’s ideas are a one-off; they aren’t; some other politicians and citizens down there agree with him.

Sowell maintains that SCOTUS is left leaning; hardly! Justice John Roberts’ court, has managed to work its will on controversial cases involving civil rights, corporate accountability, and criminal justice. Over the past six months, the Supreme Court has eviscerated a key portion of the Voting Rights Act, made it more difficult for workers to sue for racial discrimination on the job, strengthened corporate protections against legal liability, and made ritual invocation a necessary part of claiming one’s Fifth Amendment rights; so much for using the court to advance a liberal agenda.

Sowell has for years vigorously opposed anything resembling affirmative action. The notion that the 14^th Amendment might be used to redress discrimination is a problem for him. He says that over the years the Constitution has been amended over two dozen times. That’s true, of course, but none of those amendments were the result of a constitutional convention. I quote California Representative Xavier Becerra on the constitutional convention issue:

"We’ve had 11,000 attempts to amend the Constitution since 1789. Twenty-seven amendments have been passed, 10 of them in one shot with the Bill of Rights. And so, we’re now hearing that Republicans may want two, three days before they plunge us into the economic abyss, propose the eleven-thousand and first constitutional amendment so that in less than three days we pass that when it’s taken over 230 years to pass 27 out of the 11,000 that were proposed,"

Dr. Sowell should stick to economics!