Chuck Norris: Similarities between the 1st U.S. chief justice and Amy Coney Barrett
Similarities between the 1st U.S. chief justice and Amy Coney Barrett
With the U.S. Senate Confirmation Hearings slated to begin before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and run through Thursday, for President Trump's Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett, I thought it would be a good time to reflect again upon America's Revolutionary history and one of my favorite U.S. Supreme Court justices. In fact, he was the very first justice appointed to the highest court in the land by none other than our first president and general of the Revolutionary Army, George Washington, who considered him a close ally. You'll even find surprising similarities between Judge Amy Barrett and him.
John Jay was born in 1745 and grew up in Rye, New York. In 1764, he graduated from King's College in New York (today's Columbia University) before entering the legal profession. He read law in a New York law firm and then was admitted to the bar in 1768. That's when Jay entered into what would become a very distinguished history of public service.
The Supreme Court Historical Society explained: "Jay served as a delegate to both the First and Second Continental Congresses [1774-1776; 1778-1779], and was elected President of the Continental Congress in 1778 [-1779]. He also served in the New York State militia."
As if that wasn't impressive enough, Jay also helped write the New York State constitution (1777) and authored the first manual on military discipline (1777), served as chief justice of New York Supreme Court (1777-78) and he was appointed minister to Spain (1779).
The website for George Washington's estate, Mount Vernon, summarized Jay's other major contributions to our early republic:
Along with Benjamin Franklin and John Adams, he negotiated the Treaty of Paris in 1783, which ended the conflict between Great Britain and the new United States of America. Under the Articles of Confederation, Jay served as the Secretary for Foreign Affairs between 1784 and 1789. He favored a stronger federal government [than created by the Articles of Confederation] and wrote some [five] of the Federalist Papers alongside [Alexander] Hamilton and [James] Madison in support of the new Constitution." (Those three coauthors and the Federalist Papers were hugely instrumental in securing the ratification of the federal Constitution.)
In 1786, when the United States possessed a weak government functioning under the Articles of Confederation, Jay warned Washington that the population 'will be led, by the insecurity of property, the losing of confidence in their rulers, and the want of public faith and rectitude, to consider the charms of liberty imaginary and delusive' and would embrace 'almost any change that may promise them quiet and security.' Washington responded in agreement, writing Jay, 'Your sentiments, that our affairs are drawing rapidly to a crisis, accord with my own.'
It's no surprise that, in 1789, George Washington appointed Jay to be the first chief justice of the Supreme Court, a position he held until 1795, when he was elected as governor of New York (1795-1801), declining a reappointment as chief justice by America's second president, John Adams.
Mount Vernon goes on to explain just how close of comrades Washington and Jay were, even as chief justice: "Issues left over from the end of the American Revolution, including the continuing presence of British troops in the Old Northwest, the lack of American payments to British creditors for debts incurred during the Revolution, and British seizures of American vessels trading as neutrals with revolutionary France caused significant strife between England and the United States in the later years of Washington's presidency. To settle matters, [President] Washington sent Jay to London in May of 1794 [while chief justice!] to work out a solution that would avoid armed conflict between the two nations. The resulting agreement, popularly known as Jay's Treaty, secured the exit of British troops from the Old Northwest and granted Britain most-favored-nation status ensuring that the best trade deal any other nation received from the United States would also be applied to British goods."
As far as Jay's regard for all humanity, back in 1785, Jay founded the New York Manumission Society, which promoted the gradual abolition of slavery and release of slaves of African descent within the state of New York. (Alexander Hamilton also joined.) And, in 1799, as governor of New York, Jay helped pass a gradual emancipation law that led to the eventual end of slavery in New York in 1827.
Sadly, most historical treatises end Jay's service to his country with his retirement in 1801, when Thomas Jefferson became president. In fact, even Mount Vernon simply concluded: "Jay left the governorship of New York in 1801 to go into retirement, and passed away in 1829" (at the age of 83). But like most others, they overlooked what would have been regarded by Jay as his crowning service achievement.
So, what did Jay do with the last 28 years of his life?
At Wallbuilders.com, religious historian David Barton is only one of few on the entire internet who documented: "John Jay was a strong Christian, serving both as vice-president of the American Bible Society (1816-21) and its president (1821-27), and he was a member of American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions."
John Jay signed this membership certificate as president of the American Bible Society.
The website of the new Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C., further elaborated: "John Jay's contributions to the founding of the United States is significant! But did you know that under his leadership as president of the American Bible Society, he extended the influence of the Bible into Latin America and guided the organization as they increased their capability to produce more than 600,000 Bibles per year?"
Jay's veneration for the Bible was so great that in a letter to his eldest son, he wrote: "The Bible is the best of all books. … Continue therefore to read it, and to regulate your life by its precepts." As an Anglican (then Episcopalian after the Revolution), he even expounded on his biblical view of war.
When only a year into his retirement his beloved wife died, Jay used the Bible to encourage his children that her death wasn't the end. On May 28, 1802, he wrote these words to his children about her passing: "Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? … Behold I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed. … Death is swallowed up in victory. (1 Corinthians 15)."
On May 17, 1829, John Jay himself was near death after a life of serving his country. As recorded by his son, Judge William Jay, John Jay was asked if he had any words for his children, to which he responded: "They have the Book."
As Bill Federer so aptly cited, in his Last Will and Testament, Jay wrote:
Unto Him who is the Author and Giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His merciful and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and salvation by his beloved Son. He has been pleased to bless me with excellent parents, with a virtuous wife, and with worthy children.
His protection has accompanied me through many eventful years, faithfully employed in the service of my country; and his providence has not only conducted me to this tranquil situation, but also given me abundant reason to be contented and thankful.
Blessed be His Holy Name. While my children lament my departure, let them recollect that in doing them good, I was only the agent of their Heavenly Father, and that He never withdraws His care and consolations from those who diligently seek Him.
In the early days of the Revolution, when the war between England and the U.S. even exacerbated the divisive history of Catholicism and Anglicanism, Jay initially struggled to accept and even fought against Catholics occupying elected positions. However, eventually he (as well as the other founders) succumbed to the Sixth Amendment (Clause 3) of the Constitution, which states there are to be no religious tests for federal offices.
That didn't mean they couldn't exercise their political and religious preferences. John Jay became so passionate on the role of religion and faith in life and politics, on Oct. 12, 1816, he stated, "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." (Can you imagine any politician stating that today, let alone one like Jay with the history and participation in creating our republic, its Constitution and Bill of Rights?)
So, contrary to all those who today decry Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Catholic faith and her pro-life beliefs, the first U.S. Chief Justice, John Jay, would say her faith is an advantage not disadvantage to her judicial posts. Jay and the other founders and framers didn't see the First Amendment as a block to exercise their faith but a block to stop government from prohibiting their free exercise thereof, whether in their communities or the corridors of Congress.
Like John Adams and George Washington, in his Farewell Address (1796), Jay also expressed his belief that the moral tenets of Christianity were necessary for good government: "No human society has ever been able to maintain both order and freedom, both cohesiveness and liberty apart from the moral precepts of the Christian Religion. Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance, we will then, be surely doomed."
A treatise published by the Cambridge University Press described Jay's faith and practice this way: "His religious faith has been described by political and legal historians as being a new light 'Christian enthusiast' and falling among 'the most orthodox Christians.' Jay's own statements about his faith are consistent with those descriptions. The impact of Jay's faith on his public service and policy positions generally has not been mentioned, other than his belief in a 'great plan of Providence.' However, that impact was express in his antislavery, pro-Native American, peacemaking, just war, natural law, religious freedom, and other beliefs and actions."
Speaking of high values for all human life, I don't have access to John Jay's specific views on life in the womb, but I've written a former column on the fact that all of America's Founding Fathers, including those who are often wrongly regarded as the most liberal, like Franklin and Jefferson, fought to protect life from the womb to the tomb.
In his book, "Abortion: What the Founding Fathers Thought of It," Dr. Duane L. Ostler, a veteran lawyer and prolific author who received his Ph.D. in legal history, explained: "[Benjamin] Franklin wrote two short rebuttals [of abortion] under the fictitious names of Celia Shortface and Martha Careful who were incensed at [another Philadelphia printer Samuel] Keimer's having discussed abortion openly as if it were a commonly accepted practice approved by the majority. These writings directly contradict the Roe court's assertion that abortion was commonly acceptable in that day."
As a legal and constitutional student and scholar, John Jay would have been familiar if not consulted William Blackstone's widely read Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-1769). Blackstone's discussion of the quickening observes: "Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother's womb. For if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb … this, though not murder, was by the ancient law homicide or manslaughter. But at present it is not looked upon in quite so atrocious a light, though it remains a very heinous misdemeanor. …"
Blackstone's commentary conveys striking reminiscence of – and gives foundation for – the opening words in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
As Thomas Jefferson stated, it is the highest purpose of government to protect every human's rights for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is still true from the womb to the tomb.
There's no doubt that Chief Justice John Jay and Judge Amy Coney Barrett share much in common, as they do with many others on the highest court in the land. Private beliefs and values never stopped justices from being impartial and unbiased in their rulings. In fact, maybe we overlook the betterment that their differences not only represent varying slices of America but also create e pluribus unum even among the highest court in that land.
As the White House reported, I believe Sen. Ted Cruz was accurate in stating, as did a number of other senators and leaders: "Judge Barrett is well-qualified to serve on the United States Supreme Court. Having confirmed her to the circuit court in 2017 with bipartisan support, the Senate has already undertaken a thorough and rigorous review of her record."
The White House added, "A dedicated wife and mother of seven, Judge Barrett would also bring a new and important perspective to the Court. Here are just a few examples of how:
- Judge Barrett would be the first mother of school-aged children to become a Supreme Court justice. She would also become only the fifth woman ever to serve on the Court.
- As the mother of a child with special needs, she fully understands the issues and concerns that confront our nation's most vulnerable.
- Judge Barrett would be the only current justice to have earned a law degree from a school other than Harvard or Yale – having graduated at the top of her class from Notre Dame Law School in Indiana.
- She would become one of only two sitting justices to have been born and raised in the South, having grown up in Louisiana before attending college in Tennessee.
"Amy is more than a stellar scholar and judge; she is also a profoundly devoted mother," President Trump said. "Her family is a core part of who Amy is."
https://www.wnd.com/2020/10/similarities-1st-u-s-chief-justice-amy-coney-barrett/
Post a Comment