How Evangelicals Invented Liberals’ Favorite Legal Doctrine – The Federalist
Constitutional originalism has long been an unquestioned dogma for conservative evangelicals, as the recent nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court has again confirmed. Evangelical political leaders responded to the announcement with unrestrained praise. As the Southern Baptist Conventions Russell Moore wrote, Judge Neil Gorsuchis a brilliant and articulate defender of Constitutional originalism in the mold of the man he will replace: Justice Antonin Scalia.
Focus on the Familys James Dobson struck a similar note, suggesting that Gorsuch would uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and the original intent of its framers. For many evangelical conservatives, originalism has a dogma-like status not just because it is the proper way to read and interpret a text, but because the competing doctrine of the living Constitution has brought us not only the administrative state in the New Deal, but Roe and Obergefell.
Yet if John Comptons fascinating new book The Evangelical Origins of the Living Constitution is right, evangelicals at the turn of the twentieth century are largely to blame for evangelicals problems here at the turn of the twenty-first century: It was evangelicals then who made the doctrine of the living Constitution plausible, even if evangelicals today lament it.
Comptons fascinating and masterfully executed argument goes something like this: Evangelical campaigns against alcohol and lotteries in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century aimed at not merely regulating such vices, but prohibiting them. But to enact their political vision, they had to break existing traditions of constitutional interpretation. By exerting political pressure upon courts and subordinating constitutional interpretation to their political aims, evangelicals helped create the legal and intellectual conditions in which the doctrine of the living Constitution arose.
Comptons argument for this thesis is intricate, but it demands and deserves unwinding. He posits that the political and moral perfectionism of antebellum Protestants created standards of public morality that threatened the core ideals of the commercial republic that the Constitution was drafted to engender and protect. That is, evangelicals wanted to regulate public morality in ways that impinged upon commercial and business practices that had been legal, if not always favorably smiled upon, since the countrys founding.
While evangelical campaigns against liquor and lotteries eventually aimed at eradication, rather than tolerant regulation, such a goal was at odds with existing doctrines of constitutional interpretation. The attempt to abolish existing lottery grants, for instance, ran aground upon the Contract Clause, while prohibitions on alcohol possession and sales infringed commonly accepted notions of property rights. Not only that, but prohibition at the local level could not be accomplished without overcoming the Commerce Clause. Interstate sales were protected by the federal government, while police powers were reserved to local governmentsa dilemma that left immoral property free to be distributed and sold across state lines.
Compton traces these conflicts through their development in state courts, and then within the Supreme Court, to show that evangelical morality eventually influenced constitutional interpretation. To pick but one small aspect of Comptons many data points, he contends that until the mid-1870s, agreements between legislatures and private entities were contracts within the meaning of the Contract Clause, which would have included lottery grants. However, in the 1880 case Stone v. Mississippi, Chief Justice Morrison Waite invalidated such a contracta lottery grant from Mississippion grounds that the government, as Compton says, possessed the inherent right to suppress immoral activities.
It is, of course, theoretically possible that such a doctrinal shift had pristine intellectual and interpretative causes. However, Compton points out that the decision was made in the midst of a significant public controversy about the Louisiana Lottery, which was at the time probably the most notorious of the lottery companies.
As prohibitions on gambling at the local level had increased, the Louisiana Lottery had survived and expanded through interstate ales. They were so well known that in 1879, Anthony Comstockof the anti-contraception laws famearrested dozens of Louisiana Lottery agents in New York City. The Louisiana legislature subsequently revoked the lotterys 25-year charterbut it was protected in court by a judge who was, Compton says, widely denounced as a shill for lottery interests.
This was the political context in which theStone casewas decided, and which set the stakes for the Supreme Courts ruling. Protecting the lottery grant on the basis of the Commerce Clause would mean the most notoriously corrupt corporation in America would enjoy immunity for the length of its charter. However, revoking the grant would undermine the traditional interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which had protected lottery grants.
Waites opinion in Stone suggests he is not unaware of such political realities. Waite had written that because lotteries were prohibited in many states, the will of the people has been authoritatively expressed on the question. The court could either embrace precedent and oppose the will of the peopleor innovate. They chose the latter course, and created an exception that they tried to quarantine from having broader doctrinal effects.
Yet Stone did not crush the Louisiana Lottery, which survived by exerting its considerable political power to make their charter part of their states constitution, and thus outside the scope of Stones ambit. (Yes, seriously.) The survival of the Louisiana Lottery allowed it to go on flourishing through interstate sales. Much to the frustration of evangelical anti-lottery activists, as long as a single state allowed the lottery to exist, both the states and the federal government lacked the power to curtail interstate sales.
States had no power over interstate commerce, and the federal government was hampered by the distinction between its police and commerce powers. Compton argues that congressional legislation prohibiting transporting lottery tickets was the first clear exercise of federal police power. The Supreme Court upheld the law in Champion v. Ames, in which Justice Harlan argued that lottery tickets were commercial items, even though they had never been regarded as such by the law. But Harlan also emphasized the fact that lotteries had become offensive to the entire people of the Nation. The conflict, in other words, between morality and commerce was decided on moralitys sideand thus another exception was born.
While judges in such opinions attempted to quarantine the effect of their exceptions to their cases, Compton demonstrates that the logic that they relied upon was inexorable. In each area of conflict between the aims of morals legislation and the Supreme Courts doctrines, Compton traces a three-stage pattern of judicial resistanceaccommodation, andultimatelydoctrinal incoherence.
The Supreme Courts response to New Deal legislation has often been credited (or blamed) for undermining economic due process in the service of a hugely popular administrative state, a shift that some have blamed on the idea of the living Constitution. Yet as Compton observes, nearly every argument advanced during the New Deal period began by quoting from Justice Harlans opinion in Champion v. Ames. That is, it was the morals decisions of the late nineteenth century that made the New Deal cases possible.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, who is widely credited with being one of the progenitors of the doctrine of the living Constitution, repeatedly pointed to alcohol and gambling opinions to argue that as long as the regulation was reasonable, the judiciary should defer to the considered judgment of the people. Compton suggests that morals precedents thus brought the abstract arguments of the sociological jurists and the Legal Realists down to earth. That is, they made the notion of a living Constitution credible.
It is tempting to think that the political perfectionism of the late-nineteenth century evangelicals has nothing to do with the political manifestation of evangelicalism today. The campaigns against lotteries and alcohol were, after all, progressive efforts, while the struggles for marriage and religious liberty that have occupied the Religious Rights attention are largely conservative, defensive postures. And even if Comptons thesis is true, it is always open to contemporary evangelicals to disavow their own history, and simply deny that what happened in the past has any meaningful bearing on either the Religious Rights self-understanding or its political rhetoric.
Yet besides being a deeply unconservative posture, such a path would obscure the lessons Comptons book contains for political movements tempted by perfectionist idealsas the Religious Right indisputably is. For one, the political perfectionism at the heart of the anti-lottery and anti-gambling campaigns raises deep and important questions about which vices we should merely regulate and which we should prohibit, and to what lengths we will go to restrain them.
Few of us, on the Right and Left, are willing to countenance the question of which injustices we should permit as a society for the sake of not creating deeper injustices in our efforts to solve them. But in aiming to eradicate one vice, evangelical activists sowed the seeds for accomodating many others.
In aiming to eradicate one vice, evangelical activists sowed the seeds for accomodating many others.
Not only that, but Comptons thesis should prompt contemporary evangelicals to mitigate the denunciations that they direct toward the progressive left for their advancement of the living Constitution doctrine. The idea that the meaning of the Constitution should be determined by the will of the living has generated a great deal of damaging legal nonsense. From Sen.Dianne Feinsteins comments about Roe to Judge Posners recent invention of the judicial right to legislate, the living constitution has wrought a great deal of bad upon our country.
Yet if Comptons thesis is right, it means that such strong denunciations need to be accompanied by a greater deal of self-awareness than they often are, and to be decoupled from the antithesis between us and them that happens when the argument becomes defined by partisan stigma, as this one indisputably has. The doctrine of the living Constitution is bad, but its a badness which more traditions have deployed than we would want to recognize.
Comptons thesis demonstrates that within the many ironies of history, the social and political instruments a perfectionist movement deploys may be easily co-opted for ends and purposes never imagined in their development. That is, if late-twentieth-century evangelical activists sowed the wind, todays activists have reaped the whirlwind. Or, to switch the biblical reference, the constitutional sins of evangelicalisms forefathers have long been visited upon their more conservative heirs.
The value of such an account is that it requires a more complicated assessment about who is to blame for various features of our culture war. Describing the progressive Left as the aggressors in the culture war has the dual effect of preserving the Religious Rights purity and establishing its victim status. Yet Compton makes it clear that on at least one of our deepest culture war frontstheories of constitutional interpretationmatters are far more complicated than that simplistic narrative allows. The idea that the progressive Left invented the doctrine of the living Constitution ex nihilo in the 1920s plays well, but only at the expense of letting our own history and tradition off the hook.
But then, that kind of self-exonerating narrative is precisely what a culture war requires, if it is going to be fought with the energy that it (allegedly) needs. Acknowledging the complicity of ones own tradition in bringing about the social and political conditions one is decrying must inevitably chasten a movements rhetoricbut such reflective self-awareness rarely generates the kind of enthusiasm and fervor that keeps the institutional coffers full.
It is easierfar easierto simply disavow the past and pretend that evangelical politics began in 1980 with the Advent of St. Ronald of Reagan. There is nothing particularly conservative about such a strategy, inasmuch as it seeks to ignore both the debts and benefits that a movements forbearers bestowed. But there lies the ironical rub; in seeking to escape the past and define the evangelical political witness only by the living, todays Religious Right adopts the very mentality that demonstrates their continuity with their late-nineteenth-century forbearers.
Matthew Lee Anderson is pursuing a D.Phil. in Christian ethics from Oxford University, where he is also an associate fellow of the McDonald Centre for Christian Ethics. His academic work is focused articulating the grounds for procreative and parental rights, and countering anti-natalist arguments. He founded Mere Orthodoxy, and is the author of two lay-level books and numerous essays. He is a Perpetual Member of Biola Universitys Torrey Honors Institute, and lives in Waco, Texas, with his wife.
See the article here:
How Evangelicals Invented Liberals' Favorite Legal Doctrine - The Federalist
- The Impossible Plight of the Pro-Tariff Liberals - The Atlantic - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- SANDOVAL: Liberals Ruin Iconic Site With Yet Another Massive Eyesore - dailycaller.com - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- Joe Rogan mocks Canada for re-electing Liberals, claims Pierre Poilievre turned down podcast offer - Yahoo News Canada - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- The final Canada election result has a twist in the tail, Liberals on the receiving end - The Economic Times - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- Liberals on brink of near-total wipe-out in Australia's suburbs - Australian Broadcasting Corporation - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- Gender quotas are the only way for the Liberals to go: Simon Birmingham - The Conversation - May 8th, 2025 [May 8th, 2025]
- Gina Rinehart urges Liberals to stick with Trump-like policies in the wake of election loss - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Analysis | Trump is making foreign liberals, free trade and immigrants great again - The Washington Post - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- When Liberals Were on "The Wrong Side of History" - Catholic Answers - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Second-term Albanese will face policy pressure, devastated Liberals have only bad options - The Conversation - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- CNNs Donie OSullivan pushes back on annoying liberals who criticize humanizing Trump supporters - New York Post - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- The Liberals women problem may seem intractable, but heres what they could learn from the Teals - The Conversation - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- What the Liberals election win could mean for Canadas economy - The Real Economy Blog - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals win Canadian election upended by Trump, Conservative challenger loses his seat - PBS - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Canada's Liberals win minority government; Carney says old relationship with US 'is over' - Reuters - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Why Carney's Liberals won election - and the Conservatives lost - BBC - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Trump wanted to break us, says Carney as Liberals triumph in Canadian election - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals Win Canadas Election. Here Are 4 Takeaways. - The New York Times - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Sweeping policy reset needed to reconnect with voters, senior Liberals say as others call for lurch further right - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Canadas Liberals fall short of a majority in Parliament, and Conservative leader loses his own seat - WOWT - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Conservatives less trusting of science compared to liberals in the United States - PsyPost - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Trump Inserts Himself Into Canadas Election and Liberals Cant Stop Saying Merci - Rolling Stone - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Afternoon Update: Liberals start soul-searching; husbands denial in mushroom trial; and a 478-hour slow TV stream ends - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Game change Canadian election: Mark Carney leads Liberals to their fourth consecutive win - The Conversation - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- The game change Canadian election: Mark Carney leads Liberals to their fourth consecutive win - The Conversation - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- The Liberals need a few floor-crossers to form a majority. That might not be so easy - CBC - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Trump campaign chief claims he visited Australia to advise Liberals at start of election campaign - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- How the Liberals came up short in Ontario and lost their majority bid - CBC - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- The Liberals Who Cant Stop Winning - The Atlantic - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Morning Mail: Israels intensified plan to seize Gaza, the voters that swung to Labor, Liberals in crisis - The Guardian - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals win Canadas crucial election and set to form minority government - The Independent - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- Conservatives signal they are willing to back Carney's Liberals on some legislation - CBC - May 5th, 2025 [May 5th, 2025]
- The Conservatives and Liberals refuse to stand on guard - The Globe and Mail - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Candidates make final pitch in Canada election with Liberals holding lead - Yahoo - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Polls tighten as Canadians head to the polls. Will Liberals pull off the ultimate comeback? - GZERO Media - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- When equal does not mean the same: Liberals still do not understand their women problem - The Conversation - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Federal Election Poll: Liberals poised to win slim majority or minority government - Vancouver Sun - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Stories That Show How Modern Liberals Have Lost Their Way - The New York Times - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Yes, Kashmir Faces Settler-Colonialism But Not The Kind That Left-Liberals Want You To Believe - Swarajyamag - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Liberals on course to take majority of N.S. seats, polls and experts agree - CBC - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Red ripple in blue Calgary? Liberals eye record gains in Conservative stronghold - CBC - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- POLLS: Liberals hold a steady lead, and other poll insights - SooToday.com - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Liberals vs. Conservatives: comparing proposed immigration policies ahead of the 2025 election - CIC News - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Candidates make final pitch in Canada election with Liberals holding lead By Reuters - Investing.com - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Mandryk: Liberals will need more than a few NDP votes to win in Saskatchewan - Regina Leader Post - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals will stand up for British Columbia against President Trump - Liberal Party of Canada - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- 'Slugging it out': Liberals up by four points ahead of election, poll finds - National Post - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Carney tells Assembly of First Nations Liberals are committed to implementing UNDRIP - CBC - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- The phantom menaces of the Liberals and Conservatives - The Globe and Mail - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals will protect B.C. workers and build Canada Strong - Liberal Party of Canada - April 27th, 2025 [April 27th, 2025]
- First YouGov MRP of 2025 Canadian federal election shows Liberals on track to win a modest majority - YouGov /Research - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Liberals Vs Conservatives: Where Things Stand In Canada Polls 2025 - NDTV - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- As Canadas Elections Loom, Liberals, Not Trump, Are the Real Danger to the Dominions Sovereignty - The New York Sun - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Election Writ 4/22: Liberals still favoured after flurry of new polling - The Writ - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Meet the Conservative populist looking to unseat Canadas Liberals - The Washington Post - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Liberals and Conservatives fighting for support from centrist voters, poll shows - National Post - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Letters, April 23: Liberals should thank Trump if they win - Edmonton Sun - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- The fascist moment is here: Have mainstream liberals heard the alarm go off? - Salon.com - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals Stand Up to President Trump for Qubec Identity and Economy - Liberal Party of Canada - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Liberals promise $130B in new spending and no timeline to balance the budget - Yahoo News Canada - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Bill Maher taunts liberals with 1-word description of himself after Trump dinner - SILive.com - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- What went wrong with the Liberals verification system and what does it mean for the future? - The Globe and Mail - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Liberals try and recapture Toronto-St. Pauls after byelection loss - CityNews Toronto - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals to protect and modernize Canadas public health care system - Liberal Party of Canada - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- John Ivison: Carney takes to showboating as the Liberals savour their comfort zone - National Post - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Did the Liberals try to strip religious groups of charitable status? - Canada's National Observer - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Can the teal appeal hold? Liberals targeting Curtin and Goldstein argue independent wave has passed - The Guardian - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Gilbert: How Wisconsin liberals have made spring elections a nightmare for Republicans - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Opinion: The Liberals and Tories are so similar, they look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee - The Globe and Mail - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- Liberals to release fully costed platform as election campaign hits the homestretch - CityNews Toronto - April 23rd, 2025 [April 23rd, 2025]
- A case study in groupthink: were liberals wrong about the pandemic? | US politics - The Guardian - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Federal election: Conservatives and Liberals are targeting different generations and geographies online - The Conversation - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- GOP must Musk up, liberals vs. the Constitution and other commentary - New York Post - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- How to make Trump obey courts? Heres an explosive strategy liberals will love - NJ.com - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- CT liberals united on combating Trump, but issues remain - Connecticut Public - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Liberals 'abundance agenda' takes time to absorb, but it's worth it - The Statehouse File - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Liberals win majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court - CNN - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Mark Carney visits Victoria as Liberals try to break into southern Vancouver Island - Vancouver Sun - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Liberals hold Wisconsin Supreme Court after campaign shaped heavily by Musk - The 19th News - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]
- Mark Carneys Liberals to deliver urgent support to protect Canadian retirees in this global crisis - Liberal Party of Canada - April 8th, 2025 [April 8th, 2025]