X

The COVID Chronicles

We've put together all of our resources on COVID-19 on one page including radio broadcasts and live policy briefings.

View Episodes

Player

ElectionsRediscovering American HistoryRole of GovernmentWeekly/September 25, 2020

TPS60: Election 2020 — The Court and the Social Dilemma

Download Episode //

TPS60: Election 2020 — The Court and the Social Dilemma

Why is the U.S Supreme Court so important? Should it really be that important? Tune in this week as we talk about the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. What does this mean for the Election? Tune in today plus don’t miss a brief but important conversation on a film lots of people are talking about, The Social Dilemma. You don’t want to miss this.

Resources:
Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton (see below for excerpt)
The Social Dilemma, Netflix
iVoters.com

Release Date: Friday, September 25, 2020

Direct Download of This Episode Available Here

Excerpt from the Federalist No. 78 by Alexander Hamilton:

The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution. By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of the courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing.

There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws, rather than by those which are not fundamental.

It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy, may substitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature. This might as well happen in the case of two contradictory statutes; or it might as well happen in every adjudication upon any single statute. The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body. The observation, if it prove any thing, would prove that there ought to be no judges distinct from that body.

But it is not with a view to infractions of the Constitution only that the independence of the judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humors in the society. These sometimes extend no farther than to the injury of the private rights of particular classes of citizens, by unjust and partial laws. Here also the firmness of the judicial magistracy is of vast importance in mitigating the severity and confining the operation of such laws. It not only serves to moderate the immediate mischiefs of those which may have been passed but it operates as a check upon the legislative body in passing them; who, perceiving that obstacles to the success of an iniquitous intention are to be expected from the scruples of the courts, are in a manner compelled, by the very motives of the injustice they meditate, to qualify their attempts. This is a circumstance calculated to have more influence upon the character of our governments than but few may be aware of. The benefits of the integrity and moderation of the judiciary have already been felt in more states than one; and though they may have displeased those whose sinister expectations they may have disappointed, they must have commanded the esteem and applause of all the virtuous and disinterested. Considerate men of every description ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts; as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today. And every man must now feel that the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress.

Recent Episodes

Election 2020: Overcoming Fear

October 23, 2020

Why have so many expressed fear, division or isolation in regard to this coming Election? Tune in today to The Public Square® to hear more. Topic: Elections The Public Square® with hosts Dave Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd thepublicsquare.com Air Date:

Read more ›

TPS60: Election 2020 — The Circle Strikes

October 22, 2020

Remember all those conversations we have been having about the book and the movie The Circle? It appears that the rest of the media world is finally opening their eyes to the takeover of the 2020 Campaign by Silicon Valley.

Read more ›

TPS2: Election 2020 — Did Abraham Lincoln Really Say That?

October 22, 2020

Did Abraham Lincoln really say that….? Tune in today to The Public Square® to hear more. Topic: Elections The Public Square® with hosts Dave Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd thepublicsquare.com Air Date: Thursday, October 22, 2020 Direct Download of This Episode

Read more ›

TPS2: Election 2020 — The Law, Part II

October 21, 2020

What happens if we can’t get one or multiple states to certify their Election results? What does that look like? Tune in today to The Public Square® to hear more. Topic: Elections The Public Square® with hosts Dave Zanotti and

Read more ›

TPS2: Election 2020 — The Law, Part I

October 20, 2020

What does the law have to say about the upcoming federal Election? Tune in today to The Public Square® to hear more. Topic: Elections The Public Square® with hosts Dave Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd thepublicsquare.com Air Date: Tuesday, October 20,

Read more ›

TPS Express: An Opportunity to Succeed, Part II

October 19, 2020

This week on TPS Express we are continuing Part Two of a conversation with Piper Tate. How can school choice help children trapped in a cycle of poverty and violence? Tune in for 30 minutes today on TPS Express. Resources:

Read more ›

TPS2: Election 2020 — The Count

October 19, 2020

How are states handling counting mail-in-ballots on or before Election Day? Tune in today to The Public Square® to hear more. Topic: Elections The Public Square® with hosts Dave Zanotti and Wayne Shepherd thepublicsquare.com Air Date: Monday, October 19, 2020

Read more ›

TPS60: Election 2020 — What to Expect

October 16, 2020

Is the Presidential Election rigged? Will we know the results on Election Night or is there a strategy in play to place Nancy Pelosi in the White House in January? What is the right response to this dilemma? Join in

Read more ›