I’m not sure I measure up.
What does it mean to be “patriotic”? To “love one’s country”? I daresay that judgment is mostly in the eyes of those who already consider themselves “patriots,” and they will surely decide who else qualifies. Whether we ask them to do so or not.
Must we sing the “National Anthem.” Recite the “Pledge of Allegiance”? “My country, right or wrong”? Defend the “Flag”? Pray to God, in whom we must trust? Do those markers all define “patriotism”? Or is it just the last refuge of a scoundrel, as Samuel Johnson supposedly said?
Article VI of the US Constitution recites that every federal, state and local official (including ALL judges, police, and US military officers) MUST make oath to support the Constitution itself, but NO religious tests for public office shall EVER be required. That’s all. So, if one is sworn to support the Constitution, but won’t recite the Pledge, is (s)he not a “patriot”?
I won’t recite the Pledge. Not anymore. I haven’t in a long time. I was sworn in as a lawyer on October 6, 1973, making oath to uphold and defend the Constitutions of the United States and Virginia. I have not recited the Pledge ever since because I simply cannot pledge (or swear) my allegiance (loyalty) to an image or piece of cloth. Those are “graven images,” much like the Israelites’ “Golden Calf.” They mean too many different things to different people.
My loyalty is to the abstract concepts contained in the Constitution, and that is the only oath or pledge I will ever take. Things like the prohibition against double jeopardy; the freedom of expression; the right to peacefully protest; the rights to have a lawyer, and juries; the right to practice religion—or not; the right to NOT be taxed to support the religious activities of others; freedom from shariah law or other such stuff, etc. And, most importantly, the RIGHT to expect ALL public officials to honor all that. Explicitly.
Speaking of patriots, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died this past week. Before she became a federal judge she had practiced trial law, aggressively defending people’s civil liberties, which is the essence of “patriotism” in my book. She won most of her cases. Probably lost a few, too. Nevertheless, she was the LAST true civil libertarian to be on the Court. The late Thurgood Marshall is the only other one who comes to mind.
Donald Trump is expected to replace Ginsburg with a “patriot” of his own choosing. One of the leading candidates is Amy Coney Barrett, age 48, Phi Beta Kappa, a supreme honors graduate of Notre Dame Law School (first in her class), law review editor, and a judge on the federal 7th Appeals Circuit, nominated by Donald Trump in 2017. She was born the year before I graduated from law school.
Since graduation, Barrett has clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia and, until 2017, she was a law-school professor. However, just after her clerkship with Scalia, she was in private law practice for only one year. Nevertheless, she is certainly “well-qualified” for the position on the Supreme Court, but her obvious lack of experience in representing real human beings bothers me. I am somewhat biased in my belief that only those who represent actual human beings are REAL lawyers! Those whose liberty or rights are at stake must be defended by the best counsel possible, and that is what makes “America” different from ANY other country! Lots of countries are “democracies,” but only America seeks to put a leash on run-amuck majority rule! That seems to be the essence of American “patriotism.” Certain corporate shills, professors and “activists” may have law degrees and may have passed bar exams, but I don’t regard them as “real” lawyers! I assume my patriotic biases are not shared by many.
So, I’m not sure that Amy Coney Barrett qualifies as a “real” lawyer under my exacting standards. She seems quite deferential at times to her fervent Catholic beliefs, and I daresay that is probably a major element for Trump’s consideration. But I hope that she will honor the solemn patriotic declaration in Article VI (to which she is already sworn) that our Constitution, and not her God’s “law,” is and shall always be “the supreme Law of the Land.”
