The Enumeration of Certain Rights
In a time of struggle, remember today that the Bill of Rights, and all the amendments to the Constitution since belong to we who struggle to perfect freedom and justice
Happy July 4, friends—this is a short newsletter, but there is something to listen to at the bottom if you wish to skip right down there. And of course, do:
Last week’s Supreme Court decisions, and the widespread retraction of rights at the state level over the past year, makes this July 4th a bittersweet time. What is more difficult than to reaffirm our commitment to democracy when it seems not to be serving us? And yet one crucial phrase—”“the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”—reminds us that liberty looks forward, not back, as the Republican Party and the conservative Supreme Court majority would have it.
Americans have looked forward to perfect and reclaim freedom over and over again, and I challenge you to do that today. And to encourage you, I would like to re-up an essay by my former colleague, Neely Bruce, the John Spencer Camp Professor of Music at Wesleyan University. originally published in Public Seminar on December 6, 2017, about why he set the Bill of Rights to music.
Everyone who has been in a chorus knows that if you sing a text you never forget it, at least on some level. In 2005 I set the Bill of Rights to music, hoping to make the youth of America, specifically high school students, more aware of this precious text through song. Since that time there have been 30 complete performances of the work, a dozen or so performances of portions of it, and more performances of the First Amendment than I know (I stopped counting years ago, when the number passed 60). Most of the complete performances have been conducted by me; most of the partial and all of the First-Amendment-only renditions have been conducted by others.
I undertook this composition, and these performances, out of a great sense of urgency. Twelve years ago, Americans seemed only vaguely aware of the First Amendment; violations of the Fourth Amendment were routine (especially unauthorized searches); cruel and unusual punishments (torture) were back, in flagrant violation of the Eighth Amendment; and the revisionist reading of the Second Amendment (nothing like what the founders had in mind) was well established. In short, most of the Bill of Rights had been ripped to shreds. It was my belief that a greater awareness of our most fundamental rights as citizens would make things at least a bit better.
Since the presidential election of 2016 things have only gotten worse. The whole concept of due process is in jeopardy; presumption of innocence is out the window; freedom of religion and the separation of church and state are openly attacked; and the current president calls for control of the press by the executive branch. All of these issues are dealt with in the Bill of Rights, either explicitly or by implication. We are headed in the wrong direction.
These days I am resolved to perform my setting of the Bill of Rights as much as possible, and to work constantly to secure performances by other conductors and groups with whom I am not associated. Every now and then such a performance occurs. In southern California, for example, there will be a partial performance later this year. In suburban Atlanta a large church is learning the piece, one movement at a time. There are people agitating for performances in New Orleans, Houston, San Francisco and other cities. A Unitarian church in central Massachusetts plans a complete performance within the next few months.
It is still my belief that a populace truly aware of its fundamental rights under a constitutional democracy will not give up those rights without a struggle. Singing the Bill of Rights may seem a quixotic gesture, but it is a real one, and I know from years of experience that it is transformative on a local and individual level. It is fun, educational, and inspiring – and it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.
Short takes:
Why are Republicans so angry about birthright citizenship, a Constitutional right affirmed after 1862, when slavery was crumbling and the citizenship of Black Americans needed to be established in the law? In The Atlantic, one of the leading experts on the topic, historian Martha S. Jones, explains. They “are, in large part, political theater, often a way to project a tough stance on immigration,” she writes. But don’t be fooled. Like a great deal of the hateful rhetoric on the right, eliminating the right to citizenship, based on the fact of being born on U.S. soil, inspires activists who really want to do it. And undoing this right could be used to unravel all or part of the 14th Amendment, where many of our modern rights and freedoms are lodged. “When politicians dispute birthright, they also open up legal questions about where the power to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment resides. Trump suggested that with his authority, as exercised through an executive order, he could reinterpret who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and thus a birthright citizen.” (July 2, 2023)
The DeSantis campaign has released a new ad slamming Donald Trump for being soft on queers. Not surprisingly, it is being characterized as homophobic and divisive—but Republicans are among its main critics. According to Jack McCordick at Vanity Fair, “Richard Grenell, who served as Trump’s Acting Director of National Intelligence and is the country’s first openly gay cabinet member, described the video as `undeniably homophobic,’” McCordick reports. “Log Cabin Republicans, a large, pro-LGBTQ GOP group, called the ad `divisive and desperate’ and said it `ventured into homophobic territory.’ And Sarah Longwell, a moderate Republican strategist, wrote on Twitter that `the consultants who think this kind of ‘running to Trump’s right’ is going to be effective should be sacked.’” Chasten Buttiegieg, the husband of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, points out the obvious: the ad also presents DeSantis as very gay. (July 2, 2023)
In New York magazine, political reporter Rebecca Traister profiles Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who—in any country where we didn’t have a MAGA movement, Donald Trump, and several media outlets specializing in conspiracy theories—would be universally viewed as mentally ill. And yet, in the United States, there is a platform for everyone. “Kennedy crowed to me about his horseshoe coalition gathered round a campaign he views as fundamentally populist,” Traister writes. “And it’s quite a band he has put together: crunchy Whole Foods–shopping anti-vaxxers, paunchy architects of hard-right authoritarianism looking to boost a chaos agent, Nader-Stein third-party perma-gremlins, some Kennedy-family superfans, and rich tech bros seeking a lone wolf to legitimize them.” (June 30, 2023)