Goldwater Chair
I’m honored to announce that I have been named to the Barry Goldwater Chair in American Institutions at Arizona State University for 2023-24. I’ll be working with the Center for the Study of Economic Liberty to teach a class in the spring semester entitled “The American Dream: Economic Liberty as an American Institution,” and I’ll be delivering a number of public presentations, the first of which will be on October 17 at 5 p.m. at Memorial Hall on the Tempe campus, on the subject of my book Freedom’s Furies.
Foundations of Freedom: The Power of Property
The Goldwater Institute recently received a grant to prepare a series of videos on the “Foundations of Freedom.” We’ll be releasing these videos over the coming weeks—and here’s the first one, on the idea of private property. I hope you enjoy them—and please share!
The dark side of historic preservation laws
I wrote an article a few months ago for Discourse about the problems with historic preservation laws. In response, KJZZ radio in Phoenix called me up to discuss the issue, and they’ve posted the audio of that story online—you can listen here.
New poems
My poem “Osiris” was published in Pulsebeat a few weeks ago. You can read it here. I also have a few poems coming soon in Medusa’s Kitchen. Keep an eye out!
Why Haaland v. Brackeen is not the end of the story
I spoke a few weeks ago at the Cato Institute’s annual Constitution Day symposium; my presentation was about the disappointing Indian Child Welfare Act case, Haaland v. Brackeen. I also wrote about the case for the Cato Supreme Court Review. You can read the article here, and you can watch my remarks at the conference here.
Suin’ and swingin’
September was an exceptionally busy litigation month, with cases about the government refusing to give back money it illegally took, urging the Supreme Court to take up a case that bureaucrats claim ties their hands with respect to dealing with homelessness problems, and Clark County, Nevada’s astonishingly intrusive laws governing home-sharing. In the latter case, I was delighted to be able to cite Sammy Davis, Jr., in a brief. I hope it’s not the last time.
By the way, the Goldwater Institute is headed back to the Arizona Supreme Court in an important case involving the Constitution’s “Gift Clause.”
And we filed briefs in the Grants Pass case, involving the homelessness crisis caused, in part, by the Ninth Circuit, and in a case challenging the restrictions on the right to vote for appellate court judges…and tons more.
Have the courts created the homelessness crisis?
Speaking of the Grants Pass case, I had an article on Fox News’ website about that case and the Phoenix “Zone” case. Excerpt":
It didn’t just happen. The Zone was created by city bureaucrats, who chose not to enforce laws against public camping and loitering. Their excuse has been that a pair of decisions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ties their hands – and the hands of city leaders throughout the Western states under the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction – when it comes to the homelessness problem.
Those rulings – one called Martin v. Boise and the other Johnson v. Grants Pass – say that the Constitution’s "cruel and unusual punishment" clause forbids the government from arresting people for sleeping on the streets if they do so "involuntarily."
That might seem plausible at first, except the decisions define "involuntary" to mean that any time there aren’t enough beds available in city-run homeless shelters, anyone sleeping on the streets is doing so "involuntarily."
That’s nonsense. A person acts "involuntarily" if he can’t help it – not if the government fails to give him a handout. By the Ninth Circuit’s logic, someone who drives home drunk from a bar did so "involuntarily" because the government didn’t hire him a cab.
Frank Lloyd Wright: the rebel architect
I spoke at LevelUp (formerly TOS-Con) this summer about the life and career of Frank Lloyd Wright, and the video of my presentation has just been posted online. Unfortunately, due to some kind of technical error, the video consists almost entirely of my PowerPoint slides, so you'll probably find it easier to listen to, rather than watch, the presentation:
The New Deal and the Bill of Rights
I have a review of David Beito’s new book The New Deal’s War on the Bill of Rights in the latest issue of National Review. Excerpt:
Pick at random any book about the New Deal, and it will contain no mention of his policies of censorship, mass surveillance, and intimidation and persecution of political opponents. It likely will concede that his decision to imprison 100,000 Japanese Americans in internment camps was wrong but excuse his refusal to act against Jim Crow as if it were an unfortunate reality forced upon a benevolent patriarch who wished he could heal the nation.
David Beito’s The New Deal’s War on the Bill of Rights is a welcome break with such rosy nostalgia. In nine succinct and deeply researched chapters, he explores how Roosevelt and his allies masterminded “mass surveillance of private telegrams, crackdowns on free speech, inquisitorial investigations, sedition prosecutions,” and other abuses — while blithely facilitating segregation and violence in the South.
The right to earn a living
Also, I mentioned last month that I talked with Prof. Matt Rousu about how the Constitution protects the right to earn a living. He’s posted the second half of our conversation now, and you can watch them here:
“Because it’s there”?
I was asked recently to participate in a symposium for Reason Papers comparing the philosophy of Philippa Foot and Ayn Rand. I decided to focus my paper (now published) on the question of how they would view the decision of mountain climber Alex Hennold to attempt to scale California’s El Capitan—as documented in the absolutely riveting documentary Free Solo. Is it really rational to take such enormous risks…for nothing more than climbing a mountain? Here’s an excerpt:
On June 3, 2017, mountain climber Alex Hennold became the first person to “free solo” California’s El Capitan mountain—that is, climb it by himself without any equipment…. What’s notable about [the] movie is Hennold’s intense rationality and self-discipline. It’s particularly striking in scenes involving his girlfriend (now wife) Sanni. We see her understandably alarmed at the extreme danger to which he exposes himself—yet Hennold frankly tells her that he values mountain climbing more than his romantic relationship with her, and if forced to choose, would select it over her.
Hennold’s climb was an astonishing achievement, requiring great focus and diligence, and one must admire his dedication to his goal. But is it rational? Can his choice to devote such energy—and risk the feelings of those who love him to such a degree—be substantiated by reason? When mountaineer George Mallory was asked in 1924 why he wanted to climb Mt. Everest, he replied “because it is there.” I want to consider how Philippa Foot and Ayn Rand would evaluate that answer. My broader goal is to examine the role of aspiration in a morality that purports to be grounded in nature.
Lizz Wright
Christina and I had the pleasure of seeing Lizz Wright in concert at the Musical Instrument Museum a few weeks ago. She has one of the loveliest voices in music today. If you’re not familiar with her work, here’s a fine example: “Throw It Away,” which she performed as part of the UN’s “International Jazz Day” in 2022:
Heading east
October is, of course, the best month, and we will be traveling a lot. Next week, Christina will be running in the Chicago Marathon; then among some other trips, we’ll beading to Williamsburg, Virginia, where I’ll speak at the Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference at William & Mary. Don’t worry, kids, we’ll be back in time for Hallowe’en.