Centre Daily Times Logo

Their View: Let’s celebrate Magna Carta’s 800th anniversary by reclaiming our liberty | Centre Daily Times

×
  • E-edition
  • Home
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Archives
    • Contact Us
    • Plus
    • eEdition
    • Newsletters
    • Subscribe
    • About Us
    • Local
    • Penn State
    • Sandusky Scandal
    • Communities
    • Crime
    • Business
    • Education
    • Politics
    • Public Records
    • State
    • Nation/World
    • Weird News
    • Sports
    • College
    • Golf
    • High School
    • MLB
    • Motorsports
    • NFL
    • NHL
    • Outdoors
    • Penn State
    • State College Spikes
    • Politics
    • Elections
    • PSU Sports
    • PSU Football
    • PSU Basketball
    • PSU Baseball
    • PSU Hockey
    • PSU Soccer
    • PSU Volleyball
    • PSU Wrestling
    • Nittany Lines Blog
  • Penn State Football
    • Living
    • Announcements
    • Family Pages
    • Eat, Play, Live
    • Home & Garden
    • Entertainment
    • Weekender
    • Comics
    • Games & Puzzles
    • Celebrities
    • Horoscopes
    • Movie News & Reviews
    • Music
    • TV
    • Opinion
    • Editorial Cartoons
    • Submit a Letter
  • Obituaries

  • Classifieds
  • Jobs
  • Cars
  • Homes
  • Place An Ad
  • Mobile & Apps

Opinion

Their View: Let’s celebrate Magna Carta’s 800th anniversary by reclaiming our liberty

By Roger Pilon

    ORDER REPRINT →

June 15, 2015 10:21 PM

On Monday we Americans, along with our English cousins, celebrated the day 800 years ago when English barons, on the fields of Runnymede, first brought the arbitrary reign of a king under the rule of law through a written document, Magna Carta.

Yet in many ways today, as we prepare to celebrate next month our own overthrow of an English king, we find ourselves back at Runnymede, petitioning our government for relief from its arbitrary rule. The story of this triumph and turn in the history of liberty is worth retelling.

It begins before Magna Carta, with the creation of the common law in the third quarter of the 12th century in the reign of Henry II. Crafted by judges deciding disputes brought by private individuals, English common law arose after Henry established circuit courts and a central appeals court that over time made the law “common” to the realm. It was a law of rights, derived from reason and custom, aimed largely at ordering liberty, property and contracts.

King John’s abuse of those rights led in 1215 to Magna Carta — positive “constitutional” law created by a political act. English liberty thereafter grew unevenly, of course. Nevertheless, the document’s reach expanded over time. And after its eclipse during the Tudors’ reign, Sir Edward Coke, the great 17th-century English jurist and parliamentarian, brought it once more to the fore in his struggles with the Stuarts.

SIGN UP

Sign Up and Save

Get six months of free digital access to the Centre Daily Times

SUBSCRIBE WITH GOOGLE

#ReadLocal

And well it was that he did, because it was a fortunate accident of history that English settlements began just then in America. Not surprising, those settlers brought their rights as Englishmen with them, as evidenced from Virginia’s 1606 charter all the way to Georgia’s of 1732. Nor did developments back in England over this period go unnoticed abroad — the 1628 Petition of Right, the 1679 Habeas Corpus Act, the 1689 Bill of Rights after the Glorious Revolution, each of which drew upon the Great Charter and continued to inspire the colonists.

That regard for Magna Carta was especially strong as relations with England deteriorated as the 18th century wore on. In fact, as late as 1774, when the Continental Congress met to draft remonstrations, the delegates rested their case mainly on their “ancient rights” as Englishmen.

But that would end. Their repeated petitions having gone unanswered save by fleets of armies and the blood of Lexington, those who signed the Declaration of Independence appealed not to the king or Parliament but to “a candid world,” justifying independence in the name not of our ancient rights but of the universal rights of all mankind. We dissolved the political bands that connected us to England and instituted new government — “by the authority of the good people of these colonies.”

And where did we get that authority? From no one, save “our Creator.” We were born with it — born free, with natural, unalienable rights to rule ourselves. Thus the Declaration became America’s Magna Carta.

Drawing, ironically, on the writings of an Englishman, John Locke, whose ideas suffused political thought in 18th-century America, we invoked a “state of nature,” absent government, to explain the foundations of political legitimacy. We declared liberty our natural condition and government by consent the legitimate means for securing it, but only if constitutionally limited, leaving us otherwise free to pursue happiness as we wished.

And when we reconstituted ourselves 11 years later we returned to those principles, making it clear from the start that sovereignty rests with “we the people,” who constitute and empower government — by right. Government doesn’t give us our rights. We give government its powers, as enumerated in the Constitution we ratify.

And therein lies the fundamental difference between England’s and our political systems. The Glorious Revolution never resulted in so basic a break with the past, and in reconstituting the polity from the ground up, beginning with the moral order, from which the political and legal orders would be derived. Thus the doctrine of delegated, enumerated and limited powers is, properly speaking, our bill of rights. As Alexander Hamilton wrote, “The Constitution is itself, in every rational sense and to every useful purpose, a bill of rights.” Let’s remember, the actual Bill of Rights was not ratified until four years after the Constitution was written.

Today, of course, the elegant theory of legitimacy the Founders and Framers gave us has been largely abandoned. New Deal Progressives effectively rewrote the Constitution 150 years after the original writing. As a result, our constitutional presumption — “all that is not given is reserved” — now reads “all that is not reserved is given.” We’re back in the fields of Runnymede, importuning our government for relief from its assumption of plenary power.

And it isn’t only untethered executive power — arbitrary rule by the executive state — that oppresses us, but executive rule arising from congressional will — often reflecting the dynamics of special-interest politics. Exhibit A before the Supreme Court at the moment, echoing medievalism itself, is a California farmer’s challenge to a New Deal marketing scheme that allows the government to take 47 percent of his raisin crop — without compensation. Not even King John would have gone that far.

As we celebrate Magna Carta and our own independence, let’s think about reclaiming our ancient liberties.

  Comments  

Videos

Woman tells her story of DUI arrest to prevent others from drinking and driving

Snow has covered roads across the county

View More Video

Trending Stories

Here’s why Penn State wrestler Shakur Rasheed will ‘unfortunately’ be honored on Senior Day

February 19, 2019 05:44 PM

Centre County to be hit with another ‘wintry mix.’ Here’s what it could mean for your commute

February 19, 2019 12:26 PM

Penn State wrestling no longer the unanimous NWCA No. 1 after a big win for the Cowboys

February 19, 2019 06:44 PM

Here’s what’s closed Wednesday as Centre County gets hit with more winter weather

February 20, 2019 05:40 AM

A ‘snapshot’ of homelessness in Centre County: Many get help, but some still struggle

February 19, 2019 04:36 PM

things to do

Read Next

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Failures with Freeh report; townships should pay fair share for police protection

By CDT readers

    ORDER REPRINT →

February 20, 2019 12:08 PM

Centre Daily Times letters to the edition on the Freeh report and Penn State reaction, townships paying fair share for state police protection and more.

KEEP READING

Sign Up and Save

#ReadLocal

Get six months of free digital access to the Centre Daily Times

SUBSCRIBE WITH GOOGLE

MORE OPINION

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Water runoff tax needed in State College; ban on Sunday hunting makes sense

February 17, 2019 03:45 PM

Letters to the Editor

Letters: What’s the history of State High alma mater?; Sexist ad had no place at Penn State

February 14, 2019 08:20 PM

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Blame for offensive ad falls to Penn State; UConn has much to prove to fan base

February 13, 2019 08:54 PM

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Rule changes needed in Pa. legislature; carelessness shown over ad at Penn State

February 13, 2019 10:57 AM

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Paterno’s Saudi Arabia connection; state of emergency was warranted

February 09, 2019 07:22 PM

Letters to the Editor

Letters: Thankful after tragedy; Sunday hunting is a property rights issue

February 09, 2019 07:21 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

Icon for mobile apps

Centre Daily Times App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Start a Subscription
  • Customer Service
  • eEdition
  • Vacation Hold
  • Pay Your Bill
  • Rewards
Learn More
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletters
  • News in Education
  • Photo Store
  • Archives
Advertising
  • Information
  • Place a Classified
  • Local Deals
  • Place an Obituary
  • Today's Circulars
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service


Back to Story