Download Over the past two decades, our nation`s legal landscape has been

RUTGERS MODEL CONGRESS
Lobbyist
American Constitution Society
Shilpa Guha
East Brunswick High School
2
Founded in 2001, the American Constitution Society, a progressive, liberal, legal
organization, is an association of practicing lawyers, law students, scholars, judges,
policymakers, activists, and various other intellectuals who have concerns with the law,
liberty, and government. It was created with the purpose of bringing a more progressive
and Twenty-First Century vision to the Constitution of the United States, and it has
succeeded in becoming one of the nation’s leading organizations in that category.
Members of the American Constitution Society, the number of which is continuing to grow
daily, firmly believe in maintaining the fundamental principles that are stressed in the
Constitution, such as those of human dignity, genuine equality, individual rights and
liberties, and access to justice.
As it is a fairly recent organization, the American Constitution Society does not
have years of accomplishments to its credit; however, with continuous efforts and pursuing
of the society’s goals, it hopes to and plans to grow successful. To further its endeavors in
productivity of the issues previously mentioned, the American Constitution Society
launched The Constitution in the Twenty-First Century initiative, which will span over
many years (“Constitution in the Twenty-First Century” ). This project upholds the
principle that the Constitution serves the purpose of granting equality, fundamental
liberties, as well as the ability to justify and defend these rights in Court. It also intends to
turn interpretation of the Constitution away from the conservative view, which is usually
misguiding, instead encouraging progressive interpretations of constitutional law (“The
Constitution in the Twenty-First Century Project” ).
3
As part of this project, a series of Issue Groups were formed to target specific
areas of focus, challenging flawed policies in the law and introducing valid liberal
approaches for improvement. Among the several active Issue Groups is the Democracy
and Voting Group. Its main goal is to extend voting rights to all Americans, pinpointing in
the process any factors that prevent people from casting their vote or participating in the
political process of the United States. These problems vary from poor administration of
elections to registration difficulties and even to race (“Democracy and Voting”).
To
address these issues, the American Constitution Society hosted a briefing on October 4,
2006, featuring a panel discussion on the current problems with election administration,
and identified states in which they are more prevalent (“ACS Presents Hill Briefing on
Voting Administration 2006: ‘Hot Spots and Potential Problems at the Polls’”).
In
addition, certain American Constitution Society members of this group propose alternative
voting systems that would expand citizens’ rights to vote. One that has been put into use in
certain municpal elections across the United States is a method known as ranked-choice
voting, which calls for voters to place candidates by choice order. The rankings would be
used incase one candidate does not receive a majority, and would aid in the process of
arriving at a majority. A system such as this would increase the involvement of voters, as
they would hold more power in the election process. (Cobb, David, and Patrick Barrett).
The Constitutional Interpretation and Change Group works to “debunk the
neutrality” of conservative, neutral-sounding theories that advocate the strict construction
and originalism approaches to interpreting the constitution (“Constitutional Interpretation
4
and Change”). The American Constitution Society does not view these perspectives, which
argue that the Constitution should be taken exactly as it is written, with the intended
meaning at that time (“How to Interpret the Constitution: Strict Construction vs. Active
Liberty”). Instead, it supports alternative ways of interpreting the Constitution, which give
significance and meaning to the guarantees it comprises of (“Constitutional Interpretation
and Change”
).
Overseen by the Constitutional Interpretation and Change Group is the
Constitution in the Classroom project, which was implemented by many schools after
Constitution Day.
On this federally-recognized day to honor the Constitution, an
authorizing statute was issued, under which schools receiving federal funding had to supply
an educational program regarding the Constitution. Members of the American Constitution
Society were called upon to teach undergraduate, high school, or middle school students
(“The Constitution in the Classroom”). In doing so, the American Constitution Society has
made and will continue to make the youth more aware of fundamental constitutional
principles and as a result, introduce them to their basic civil liberties as well.
The American Constitution Society is determined to give citizens the most
possible access to the liberties granted by the Constitution. In its pursuit to steer the nature
of American law in a more broad-minded direction, the American Constitution Society
strives to foster, in the nation’s citizens, the notion that this law has great impact on their
lives, and that they have the ability to bring improvements to it. With this, the organization
recognizes several other issues it wishes to address, legitimizing the progressive vision it
carries to the American people.
5
The American Constitution Society’s active interest in the Bill of Rights and the
liberties it grants extend to the issue of constitutional limitations of the right to bear arms.
The 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights reads, “No soldier shall, in time of peace be
quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a
manner to be prescribed by law” (“The Bill of Rights”). This has been interpreted in two
different ways. One maintains that every citizen of the United States should be allowed to
carry his or her own gun, and the other sees the amendment as a collective right, created for
the purpose of national security, not for the use of any ordinary citizen (“Constitutional
Topic: The Second Amendment”). The American Constitution Society acknowledges that
forty-two states have constitutional provisions securing the individual right to bear arms,
and it is under those same provisions that the state courts determine the constitutionality of
gun control. While the American Constitution Society stands for all rights granted to
American to be upheld, the issue of bearing arms is one that involves protection of citizens.
Therefore, the American Constitution Society advocates the passage of gun control laws
that provide for the protection of Americans, so long as the underlying right is not taken
away (Winkler). For example, the licensing and registration of handgun sales is acceptable,
granted it serves the purpose of ensuring safety, and does not nullify altogether the right to
bear arms (“Hillary Clinton on Gun Control”).
Continuing its efforts to turn the Conservative element that is being utilized to
represent the Constitution into a more liberal, progressive one, the American Constitution
Society would like to bring to light the topic of faith-based initiatives. These are essentially
governmental funds provided to various religious organizations for the purpose of aiding
6
them in their charitable endeavors. Just recently, President George Bush established a
Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the Department of Homeland
Security, in order to “expand opportunities for faith-based and other community
organizations and to strengthen their capacity to better meet America's social and
community needs” (“Executive Order: Responsibilities of the Department of Homeland
Security with Respect to Faith-Based and Community Initiatives” ). He also created
centers, as well as the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives, in
other Federal agencies, believing these would strengthen the function of faith-based and
community organizations in performing social services and ultimately benefiting the poor
(“White
House Faith-Based and Community Initiative”). While the President deems these
policies beneficial to the nation, the American Constitution Society argues that faith-based
initiatives violate the constitutional principle of separation between church and state. On
February 21, 2007, the American Constitution Society hosted a national press briefing on
the Supreme Court case Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, in which several
experts spoke on the issues of church and state, focusing mainly on taxpayers having
standing under the Establishment Clause to bring challenges. What was discussed by these
panelists reflected the American Constitution Society’s position on the issue as well. Faithbased initiatives bring to light the epic battle over the religion clauses and the religious
ramifications and overtones seen in some of today’s laws and policies (“ACS Press
Briefing on Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation”). The American Constitution
Society believes that no branch of government, the executive branch included, should extol
religion or its role in society. What our organization would eventually hope to see or
accomplish is to enable taxpayers to bring charges against the executive branch if ever it
7
shows preferential treatment or extra promotion to religious groups over secular groups.
In the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, it states, “Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion” (“Establishment Clause”).
The American
Constitution Society, recognizing the importance of Constitutional law, also acknowledges
that intertwining religion into this law goes against the progressive vision our group wishes
to advance, but it also goes against the very law itself. If it is said that Congress shall make
no such laws, the executive branch should follow suit and if it fails to do so, American
citizens, especially taxpayers whose money is going towards these religious institutes or
organizations, should be allowed to voice their objections. The American Constitution
Society wishes to grant them this voice.
The growing national network that of the American Constitution Society values
the U.S. Constitution above all law and supports the idea that citizens should use this law to
derive all the freedoms they are granted in the Constitution. One such freedom, included in
the First Amendment, is that of the press. This provision serves the purpose of protecting
the press from all government, whether local, state, or federal (“The First Amendment and
Freedom of the Press”). However, there have been multiple past instances in which the
government has tried to withhold the rights of the press, or limit its freedoms, claiming that
it exposed certain information that was vital to national security. The American
Constitution Society views the Freedom of the Press as a fundamental Constitutional right.
Issuing limits on this right indicates the desire of government to be secretive, and may
eventually lead to its finding loopholes to this right, creating more laws in attempt to bound
the press. As far as national security is concerned, the American Constitution Society feels
8
that although the government has expressed concerns that the media releasing information
on national security is harmful to the nation, there has been little concrete, specific proof to
back up that notion. Of course, the release of too much information or anything along those
lines should not be accepted, but the American Constitution Society nonetheless would
argue that the media has its constitutional right, which should not be infringed upon. The
American Constitution Society believes that, even in matters of national security, the media
must fulfill its essential role in our democracy, which is to give information to the public,
thereby exposing corruption in the government as well as any other important issues that
need to be brought attention. In the words of Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, “the press
was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a
free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government” (“Petition For
a Writ of Certiorari”).
While the American Constitution Society believes in the press exercising its full
right, it also sees the harms that could result from the executive branch, being the President,
having too much freedom. The Constitution clearly defines the rights that are granted to the
three branches of government; however, over the years, various branches have overstepped
rights of the others. In fact, journalists have argued that the ideal of limiting government
power has been “transformed into the largest expansion of executive power since Franklin
Delano Roosevelt” (“New Developments in the U.S. Attorney Controversy: Why Bush
Refuses to Allow Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to Testify Before Congress, and What Role
New White House Counsel Fred Fielding May Play”). In 2003, Valerie Plame Wilson was
revealed to be a covert CIA agent. The White House was required to investigate; however,
9
Vice President Dick Cheney said he and President Bush needed an executive order to
declassify documents as they felt was necessary (“Administration Security Breaches
Involving Valerie Plame Wilson”). Nowhere in the Constitution is the executive branch
given the right or the power to withhold information (“The United States Constitution”).
The Separation of Powers and Federalism Group of the American Constitution Society, at
this year’s National Convention in June, discussed the assertions of presidential authority,
which George Bush has been pursuing to expand. This significant increase has become
largely unchecked by Congress and the Judiciary. The American Constitution Society
would argue that the President should not cross his boundaries of given powers. As the
Constitution stands, the President is given a great many privileges and the American
Constitution Society would look favorably upon limiting presidential authority strictly to
what the Constitution states. For example, it does not believe that the Executive has the
authority to authorize domestic surveillance, especially in the case of the NSA wiretapping
program and other issues of national security (“2006 National Convention: Separation of
Powers and Federalism Issue Group”). The President is not at liberty to release such vital,
otherwise secretive information of Americans’ to the government. Being that the American
Constitution Society wishes to give the citizens themselves a larger say in laws that affect
them, in cases such as the aforementioned, they should have the right to privacy, and while
the President may, in his defense to exercise more power, argue that releasing such
information would be imperative to the protection of national security, the protection of
Americans’ rights cannot be compromised. It is a goal of the American Constitution
Society to ensure that presidential powers are kept in check, while still keeping the nation
as a whole safe.
10
Firm believers of genuine equality, the American Constitution Society wishes to
spread those same values to Americans across the nation. It encourages people to search
for greater freedom and to do so by invoking the principles of the Constitution. Its
preeminent aim and mission is to restore to the republic the fundamental values of liberty,
justice, and genuine equality that have, in recent years, been pushed to the side by
Conservative principles. By educating the people of the United States on the nature of
American law, the members of the American Constitution Society, comprising of lawyers,
policymakers, and countless other concerned individuals, hope to expose to citizens the
legitimacy and vitality of a new progressive vision. As our time period has moved away
from a Conservative era, our society must also do the same, and it must loosen the power
grab that the Conservative view has placed on the government. The American Constitution
Society hopes that by instilling this progressive vision in the minds of Americans, it can
implement aspects of this vision into the law. Over the past six years, the organization has
grown to great proportions, spreading its debate and its ideas across the nation, invoking
thought, and inspiring change. As it continues on this endeavor, the American Constitution
Society hopes to and aims to bring about progressive change in the law, and use it to
impact Americans’ lives for the better. In the words of Lisa Brown, Executive Director of
the American Constitution Society, “ [We] are working to promote a progressive vision of
the Constitution, the law, and public policy on every important issue facing our country,
and to build a diverse and dynamic network of moderates and progressives committed to
bringing about positive change” (“About the American Constitution Society”). It is the
11
goal of the American Constitution Society that our network will continue to spread its
influence for many years to come.
12
Works Consulted
“2006 National Convention: Separation of Powers and Federalism Issue Group.” American
Constitution Society for Law and Policy. Online. Internet.
<http://www.acslaw.org/node/2935> 25 March 2007.
“About the American Constitution Society.” American Constitution Society for Law and
Policy. Online. Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/about/mission> 1 March 2007.
“ACS Press Briefing on Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation.” American
Constitution Society for Law and Policy. Online. Internet.
<http://www.acslaw.org/node/4349> 20 March 2007.
“ACS Presents Hill Briefing on Voting Administration 2006: ‘Hot Spots and Potential
Problems at the Polls.’” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. Online.
Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/node/3363> 18 March 2007.
“Administration Security Breaches Involving Valerie Plame Wilson.” U.S. House of
Representatives. Online. Internet.
<http://www.house.gov/inslee/docs/pdfs/security_breach_factsheet.pdf> 25 March
2007.
“The Bill of Rights.” The Bill of Rights Institute. Online. Internet.
<http://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/Instructional/Resources/FoundingDocuments/
Docs/TheBillofRights.htm> 21 March 2007.
Cobb, David, and Patrick Barrett. “Preserving and Expanding the Right to Vote: RankedChoice Voting.” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. July 2006.
Online. Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/files/Cobb%20et%20al%20%20Ranked%20Choice%20Voting--FINAL.pdf> 18 March 2007.
“Constitution in the 21st Century.” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
Online. Internet.
<http://www.acslaw.org/c21?PHPSESSID=a23f81d6ade0ca899f744360d9e2162d>
1 March 2007.
“The Constitution in the Twenty-First Century Project.” American Constitution Society for
Law and Policy. Online. Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/node/2345> 15 March
2007.
“Constitutional Interpretation and Change.” American Constitution Society for Law and
Policy. Online. Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/c21/constitutionalinterpretation>
21 March 2007.
13
“The Constitution in the Classroom.” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
Online. Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/conclass> 21 March 2007.
“Constitutional Topic: The Second Amendment.” The U.S. Constitution Online. Onlin.
Internet. <http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_2nd.html> 24 March 2007.
“Democracy and Voting.” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. Online.
Internet. <http://www.acslaw.org/c21/voting> 18 March 2007.
“Establishment Clause.” First Amendment Center. Online. Internet.
<http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/rel_liberty/establishment/index.aspx> 20
March 2007.
“Executive Order: Responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security with Respect
to Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.” The White House. Online. Internet.
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060307-5.html> 20 March
2007.
“The First Amendment and Freedom of the Press.” Online. Internet.
<http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itdhr/0297/ijde/goodale.htm> 20 March 2007.
“Hillary Clinton on Gun Control.” Issues 2000: Every Presidential Candidates’ View on
Every Issue. Online. Internet.
<http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton_Gun_Control.htm> 25 March
2007.
“How to Interpret the Constitution: Strict Construction vs. Active Liberty.” The People’s
Media Company. Online. Internet.
<http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/171205/how_to_interpret_the_constituti
on_strict.html> 21 March 2007.
“New Developments in the U.S. Attorney Controversy: Why Bush Refuses to
Allow Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to Testify Before Congress, and What Role
New White House Counsel Fred Fielding May Play.” FindLaw: Legal News and
Commentary. Online. Internet.
<http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070323.html>
“Petition For a Writ of Certiorari.” American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
Online. Internet.
<http://www.acslaw.org/files/2007%20Moot%20Court%20Problem.pdf> 20 March
2007.
“White House Faith-Based and Community Initiative.” The White House. Online. Internet.
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/president-initiative.html> 20 March
2007.
14
Winkler, Adam. “Guest Blogger: The Reasonable Right to Bear Arms.” American
Constitution Society for Law and Policy Blog. Online. Internet.
<http://www.acsblog.org/bill-of-rights-guest-blogger-the-reasonable-right-to-beararms.html> 24 March 2007.
“The United States Constitution.” The U.S. Constitution Online. Online. Internet.
<http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html> 25 March 2007.