Every man thinks he is on the side of liberty and that his opponent is not, Professor of Politics Adam Carrington said in a lecture last week.
In his discussion of constitutional liberty hosted by the Classical Liberal Organization, Carrington summarized the thesis of his book, published in 2019, “Justice Stephen Field’s Cooperative Constitution of Liberty: Liberty in Full.” The book explores the jurisprudence of Stephan Field, a Supreme Court justice during the Reconstruction Era, and his assertion that true liberty is only attainable from a common ground between two opposed sides of debate.
“The goal of the Constitution was to protect individual rights,” Carrington said. “There was a liberty from government. It was a threat and needed to be restrained. But there was a liberty through government. Others can violate rights and government action is needed to protect those rights. And that would be liberty in full.”
Carrington said he discovered this definition of liberty while researching Stephen Field.
According to Carrington, many of Field’s biographers claim he is an “anarchical capitalist” who believes that government is always a threat to one’s life, liberty, and property. This is only partially true, Carrington said.
While Field sought “to restrain government action, opposing, for example, government-granted monopoly and price controls, there are many more instances of him upholding regulations than striking them down.”
Field’s willingness to find liberty from various approaches contributes to his rulings as a Supreme Court justice, according to Carrington. Most often, Field used the 14th Amendment to defend liberty. The Equal Protection Clause, Field said, protects property rights as well as the rights to life and liberty. This is because liberty includes both the right for one to “possess” something and the right for him to “exercise” it, Carrington said.
“The bridge of the two opposite parties makes Field unique among Supreme Court justices,” said junior and CLO officer Holden Palmer, who attended the lecture. “Field’s opinions offer a unique perspective into the thoughts of a man who broke with his party at large in favor of preserving the Union. His stance on Constitutional rights seems very complex, but his actions remained straightforward—he promoted protecting the rights of the public at large when they could be construed as reasonably infringed upon.”
Carrington said the contention surrounding liberty often hinders its discussion since people who seek to define liberty tend to talk past one another.
“Liberty was a source of constant assertion and debate,” he said.
While each side of the debate seeks to understand liberty, only by combining the two does one discover “Liberty in Full,” Carrington said.
President of CLO and senior Devon Downes said the organization seeks to discuss topics such as liberty in a respectful manner. Downes said Carrington’s lecture helped him to better understand liberty.
“This discussion helped in defining what we mean by the word “liberty,” rooting it in the political theory of the Declaration of Independence,” Downes said.
