Arguably, few who have read the United States Constitution, noticed the three words that support the argument that the Naming Commission and implementation of its recommendations were unconstitutional: “Bill of Attainder”. And those who did, most likely paid little attention.
But hidden in Article 1, Section 9 is a provision that was adopted without resistance by The Constitutional Convention in 1787, and inherited from the Founders’ desire to break from the practices of the old world which smacked of monarchical tyranny. And it is the basis for President Trump and the Department of Defense to reverse all the Naming Commission implemented recommendations without a second thought.
In England, Parliament circumvented the authority of the courts by passing laws unilaterally declaring one (or more) individuals guilty of some convenient crime and providing a punishment. When this occurred, the victims’ rights were said to be “attained” or nullified – they could no longer own property or convey it to any family members. All their goods escheated to the Crown.
Any honors, titles, or benefits they had earned were also stripped, resulting in ‘corruption of blood’ where the only thing the victim could pass down to their posterity was stigma and shame and forfeiture of social rights into perpetuity, no matter how innocent or far removed by time a descendant might be.
The Founders realized the injustice of such laws, combined with the incentive for graft and corruption that the Attainder laws created….an ongoing stream of revenue to the Crown from a parliamentary witch hunt.
It was also observed that attainders would likely break ordinary bonds of attachments the victims’ descendants might otherwise feel for their own government, and plant the seed of discontent as a result of the Government (and society’s) hate of their heredity.
The Founders wanted none of this, and prohibited not only Congress, but any State from passing any “Bills of Attainder.”
Sound familiar? Removals of base names, ROTC battle streamers, just to name a few constitute honors granted but removed pursuant to a Congressional Act meant to stigmatize a group’s progeny into perpetuity. By the passage of section 370 of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress did just that when they adopted Elizabeth Warren’s Naming Commission provision based on her contention of universal, and individual guilt for treason, acting as judge, jury and executioner, with a complicit Congress behind her, despite President Trump’s veto of the troublesome Law. The Law singled out a deemed group unworthy to have any honors based on their military service, over 150 years after the fact, and saddling their descendants with hereditary shame and stigma. No trial, no treason. No treason, no condemnation. No condemnation, no cancellation.
So, when military bases were renamed, battle streamers were removed, paintings disposed of, and monuments, memorials, sculptures, hauled away, and grave sites desecrated, what is happening in the United States of America is no less than the fruits of the passage of a prohibited Bill of Attainder.
Upon taking the oath of office, the President of the United States of America pledges to support and defend the Constitution. The members of the Executive Branch, including the Secretary of Defense, take the same oath. Perhaps Lloyd Austin didn’t read that part of the Constitution. Let’s hope that Trump and Hegseth do.
With respect, Mr. McCallister, what else can one expect from a conquering empire? Civil asset forfeiture laws and the federal courts’ interpretation of eminent domain powers have essentially provided the government at all levels with powers equivalent to or greater than those provided by bills of attainder. PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey is just one glaring example (see here https://www.oyez.org/cases/2020/19-1039). Not a single Supreme Court Justice ruled correctly in that case. If, according to the Supreme Court itself, Congress can delegate the eminent domain power to a bureaucracy which can then delegate it to a private corporation and the States cannot do anything to oppose it, private property ownership is dead in the United States, subject only to the whims of bureaucrats, judges, and CEOs. Bills of attainder are child’s play by comparison.
As for Trump and Hegseth, they’ve already demonstrated their intentions by renaming Fort Bragg and Fort Benning after Northern soldiers from the First and Second World Wars. They will not fight to defend Southern culture and distinctiveness because they view the South merely as part of their “American Nation.” I applaud Trump for his efforts to make the federal government more transparent and to rein in corruption and waste, but it seems clear to me that he views this as a dead issue. Congress, weak-kneed Republicans included, already overrode his veto. From his perspective, why should be pick a fight he’s already lost when he has more pressing issues to address in a very limited amount of time? With bigger fish to fry (like gutting the federal bureaucracy one office at a time), Trump is going to pick his battles carefully, and I don’t think he sees any value in picking this one.
“Trump is going to pick his battles carefully, and I don’t think he sees any value in picking this one.”
I tend to agree with your comment. However, President Trump has a tendency to pull up a surprise now and then.
White Southern Males gave the world its first taste of freedom. We killed so many redcoats at Kings Mountain, Cowpens and Yorktown, the king had to sue us to make peace. The yankees had already given up on freedom…we forced them to come along with us. For that, they and the rest of the world will forever owe us a debt of gratitude. This internet they intended to keep us distracted by has given us the freedom to push truth without cease. Do your duty. Push truth. Without cease.