Civil liberties, political violence, and the attack on Trump
I had a different plan for this week’s newsletter. With all the Supreme Court decisions out of the way and me out on vacation in Ireland, colleagues were going to write about the major developments for online speech from the most recent term. (Not to worry, though, you’ll still get that soon.)
But then, on July 13, there was an assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. One that resulted in the death of an American citizen attending a political rally. It’s surreal to get that kind of news in a foreign country and then have people ask you about what’s going on back home.
We still don’t know very much about the shooter’s motive. But this should be a reminder of what’s really at stake when we’re talking about civil liberties and the rule of law. These are core principles behind the American experiment.
These principles are as radical now as they were when the Constitution was written. But the alternative to persuasion and trust in the rule of law has always been violence and the use of force. We cannot abandon our American birthright to instead choose that well-worn and rocky path.
Our statement: https://t.co/O01qdcK5pn pic.twitter.com/uN3ldX9aQp
— Americans for Prosperity (@AFPhq) July 14, 2024
In the last several years we’ve experienced many instances of violence and bloodshed either to silence opponents or supposedly as a way to express outrage.
Sometimes violent and destructive riots followed the death of George Floyd; the Supreme Court’s decision reversing Roe v. Wade; and, more recently, October 7, over Israel, Hamas, and Gaza.
The harsh and unfortunate reality is that, historically, political violence is not that uncommon. Looking back across the centuries, deep disagreements commonly resulted in violence. Transitions of power were usually accompanied by armies and bloodshed, not inaugural balls.
But our Constitution set us on a different course. Written limits on government power – with ambition set against ambition to keep one another in check – and the protection of civil liberties for every citizen remains an experiment 250 years after our founding.
But it’s one we cannot allow to fail.
Here’s some good news. The vast majority of us agree. We too often hear loud voices from the extremes trying to justify political violence. But almost all of us recognize that violence is not speech.
The Polarization Research Lab (PRL), a cross-university project of Dartmouth, Stanford, and the University of Pennsylvania with a mission to uncover the drivers of partisan animosity, has revealed the following:
- In addition to overestimating the extremism of political opponents, Americans also significantly overestimate the risk of political violence from their opponents.
- PRL survey data from the past 15 months shows that fewer than 4% of Americans support violence against political opponents.
There’s no doubt this is a challenging time for America. But rather than discourage us, the attempted assassination of former President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, should be a reminder of what is truly at stake.
Our divides are real. But rather than resort to bloodshed, our Constitution offers us the opportunity to work out those differences peacefully.
Let’s continue to choose that exceptional path.
