The Red Mass

Description

America is a country that is based on the belief that the conflicts between people are a source of strength in a community. The abiding boundary on that belief is a separation between individual action on a belief and the actions as a representative of the community. One of the most fundamental dichotomies in our culture is the separation of religious belief and political action. In Western religious thought the most basic driving distinction has been between Catholicism and Protestant thought. Much of the history of America before the revolution was driven by this. We learned from this that religion has no real place in secular politics. Another parallel line of reasoning has led to the concept of privacy and conspiracy. The belief that democratic politics can't be fair and equitable if the color of authority acts in a way to deprive the constituency from knowledge of those acts until after the fact. These two lines of thought are relevant today and will be relevant tomorrow.

“When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property.”

                                                                                                        said to Baron Humboldt
                                                                                                        'Life of Jefferson' (p. 356)

Jonathan H. Adler recently wrote a piece for The Volokh Conspiracy about the attendance by several Supreme Court Justices to a annual Catholic mass held in Washington for legal professionals. This event, called The Red Mass by some, apparently raised some questions of propriety for CNN. Mr. Adler is a well respected lawyer focused on environmental and constitutional questions. The basic question raised by CNN was that this attendance represents a form of conflict of interest by the justices. Adler's response was that it was not a conflict because individuals, even when holding public office, have a right to believe, speak and associate as they will. Such participation should only be held to be in conflict if there were some indication that participation was an agreement to act in the interest of some party under their authority as justices. At no point was any such evidence actually presented. It would be a sad state of affairs if the justices needed to be insulated from popular discussion of issues and policies.

Original URL

http://volokh.com/2009/10/04/the-red-mass/

http://volokh.com/2009/10/04/the-red-mass/