Heritage Events Podcast
The Framers’ View of Property
Contemporary Supreme Court jurisprudence treats “property” as far less deserving of judicial protection than “life” or “liberty.” The Supreme Court, however, has misread American legal history. Anglo-American traditions, customs, and law held that property was an essential ingredient of the liberty that the colonists had come to enjoy and that must be protected against arbitrary governmental interference. The Framers' generation believed that “property” and “liberty” were equally important institutions and that neither one could exist without the other. The Framers venerated property as a means of guaranteeing personal independence because (among other things) the concept of “property” embraced the legal rights to which everyone was entitled, such as the right to governance under “the rule of law.” Property was not immune from regulation, but that regulation had to be for the purpose of promoting “the general Welfare,” not the interests of specific groups or people. It is time for the Supreme Court to revisit Anglo-American legal history and to re-examine its precedents in light of what that history teaches. For a complete list of speakers, topics, and dates of the Free Markets: The Ethical Economic Choice speaker series visit heritage.org/free-markets.
Is the President Trumping Constitutional Norms?
Since taking office, President Trump has been derided by the mainstream media and his critics as running roughshod over constitutional norms, fueling the conviction of liberals and some moderate conservatives that the 45th President poses an ongoing threat to the Constitution. InDefender in Chief, constitutional scholar John Yoo argues that Trump’s adversaries have things exactly backwards. Far from considering Trump an inherent danger to our nation's founding principles, Yoo contends that the Framers would have seen Trump as restoring their vision of presidential power. It is instead liberal opponents who would overthrow existing constitutional norms in order to unseat Trump, thereby inflicting permanent damage on the presidency.Join us for a lively and timely discussion on presidential power and constitutional norms in the Trump era, with the book’s author, John Yoo, and well-known legal scholar David Rivkin.
How to Start an Education Pod: Civil Society's Response to COVID-19
As many schools across the country remain closed, parents are banding together to form “education pods,” pooling resources, grouping their children in co-quarantined clusters, and hiring a teacher or private tutor for instruction. It is a real-time, large scale example of civil society in action; what Edmund Burke called the “little platoons” that make America an exceptional nation. How do these education pods work for students, and how might they benefit teachers and families? How do you form an education pod of your own?Join us for a discussion on how to build your own education pod with policy experts and parents who have created successful pods and microschools.
Re-Designing the Marine Corps for Future War: Necessity or Madness?
General David H. Berger, Marine Corps Commandant, is aggressively pushing a dramatic redesign of the Corps for future war incorporating new missiles, advanced sensors, unmanned platforms, and hypervelocity weapons. HisForce Design 2030effort has drawn enthusiastic support from those who agree that the Corps must change to remain relevant on a more lethal battlefield. But it has generated an equally fervent amount of criticism from others who think the effort is overly focused on China—rendering the Corps irrelevant across a range of other potentially more likely scenarios. To achieve its vision, the Corps is doing away with tanks, reducing conventional artillery, shrinking units, and placing new demands on the Navy, already struggling to modernize its fleet. But it is adding anti-ship missiles, doubling-down on unmanned systems, and reenergizing a profound discussion about the importance of naval power.Will a redesigned Corps make it irrelevant for land operations against conventional militaries of larger state powers or irregular forces like terrorist groups? Or are General Berger’s designs essential to America’s future ability to conduct nearly any military operation in any theater against a host of potential enemies?Join us for an in-depth conversation about all of this with nationally recognized experts who hold informed opinions on both sides of this issue: Dr. Frank G. Hoffman, Lt. Col. USMCR (Ret.), Distinguished Research Fellow at the National Defense University, and Mark F. Cancian, Colonel, USMCR (Ret.), Senior Advisor, International Security Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies.