There’s been a lot of talk lately about due process. In the wake of a nightmarish shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando, arguments have been fierce about whether or not a restriction of gun rights for those on the so-called terror watch list or no-fly list could have prevented the horrific carnage. Quickly, the idea of due process became a central part of the debate. Here’s why: According to the Constitution’s 5th amendment, no person shall be
…deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.
That seems pretty straightforward. The General government is prohibited from depriving you of your rights, property, or life, unless the proper steps have been taken. A good understanding of historical context informs us that the proper steps which define due process include a criminal accusation, a proper defense, in many cases trial by jury, and finally a conviction which relies on the determination that the accused committed the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
And so it’s fairly plain to see why gun rights proponents have been critical of the notion that mere suspicion by the government that you are a terrorist or an otherwise arbitrary and secretive determination that you cannot fly on a commercial airliner rise to the level of due process. It’s understandably worrisome that many of our noble heroes in Congress have been willing to completely and totally forsake their oath to uphold the Constitution by advocating the deprivation of your rights in contravention of the 5th Amendment’s plain language.
Now I’d like to shift a little and speak directly to Constitutional Libertarians. So far I’d bet we’re on the same page: in order to protect the rights of the innocent, due process is an important bulwark against the encroachments of an ever growing State that is better depicted by Stephen King’s Langoliers than Hamilton’s benevolent elites.
So if we can agree on that, answer me this: why is it that the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings don’t garner your support for their due process? If you’re so concerned with due process protections against the removal of your right to defend yourself, then why on earth can’t you take a stand for the due process protections against the deprivation of life from an innocent human being who cannot defend himself? Why is that?
With the Supreme Court’s recent 5-3 ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the court has proclaimed to the world once again that murdering babies is the right which takes precedence over the life of the baby. And where is the outcry about the baby’s due process? Who will defend them? Will the state of Texas take a cue out of the Brits’ playbook and stage their very own Texit over this horrendous injustice? Of course they won’t. Because due process for guns is worth defending with your sacred honor, but due process for unborn babies? Nope, that one didn’t quite make the list of causes worthy enough for your to defend your position.
Folks, we are hopelessly lost. Let us pray we find the courage to stand up and continue fighting our battle for Liberty. And while we’re at it, let’s see if we can find some time to battle for unborn babies’ liberty as well. We’d be hypocrites if we didn’t.