Majority tyranny

American values

• Democracy

• Liberty

• Equality/Equal opportunity/equal treatment under the law

• When might democracy come into tension with liberty and/or equality?

What are some examples of “minorities”?

• Racial and ethnic minorities

• Political minorities

• Religious minorities

• Minorities in sexual orientation

• Others?

Why was James Madison worried about majority rule in a

democracy?

Founders’ concerns about tyranny of the majority

• The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property.

Controlling its effects

• If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution.

Why did James Madison say that the American

Constitutional system protects minorities against majority

tyranny?

Controlling its effects

• The majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression.

• (Representative governments) refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.

Controlling its effects• The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct

parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary

Does Madison’s argument ring any bells?

Does the large republic theory in fact protect minority rights from

oppression by the majority?

Evaluate this statement:Some minority groups will be

over-represented in our democratic system, other

minority groups will be underrepresented.

Does this matter?

When is liberty at odds with the public good?

Restrictions on Liberty during national emergencies

Historical restrictions on liberty during emergency and war

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)

“Sedition Act”

• If any persons shall unlawfully combine or conspire together, with the intent to oppose any measures of the government of the United States…or write, print, utter or publish…any malicious writings against the government of the United States…or the Congress or president, or to bring …them into contempt or disrepute or excite against them the hatred of the good people of the United States…they shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

“Alien Act” (1798)

• “Whenever there shall be a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government…all natives, citizens, denziens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.”

Historical restrictions on liberty during emergency and war

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)

• Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus

• Sedition Act of 1918

Sedition Act of 1918

• Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall ... willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall … by word or act oppose the cause of the United States … shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.

Historical restrictions on liberty during emergency and war

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)

• Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus

• Sedition Act of 1918

• Executive Order 9066

Executive Order 9066• l hereby authorize and direct the Secretary of War, and the Military

Commanders whom he may from time to time designate, whenever he or any designated Commander deem such action necessary or desirable to prescribe military areas in such places and of such extent as he or the appropriate Military Commander may determine, from which any or all persons may be excluded, and with respect to which, the right of any person to enter, remain in, or leave shall be subject to whatever restriction the Secretary of War or the appropriate Military Commander may impose in his discretion. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to provide for residents of any such area who are excluded therefrom such transportation, food, shelter, and other accommodations as may be necessary, in the judgment of the Secretary of War or the said Military Commander and until other arrangements are made, to accomplish the purpose of this order.

Korematsu v. United States

• It is said that we are dealing here with the case of imprisonment of a citizen in a concentration camp solely because of his ancestry, without evidence or inquiry concerning his loyalty and good disposition towards the United States. Our task would be simple, our duty clear, were this a case involving the imprisonment of a loyal citizen in a concentration camp because of racial prejudice. Regardless of the true nature of the assembly and relocation centers-and we deem it unjustifiable to call them concentration camps with all the ugly connotations that term implies-we are dealing specifically with nothing but an exclusion order.

Historical restrictions on liberty during emergency and war

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)• Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus• Sedition Act of 1918• Executive Order 9066• FBI surveillance of civil rights and anti-war

leaders• The PATRIOT ACT• NSA Wiretapping

PATRIOT ACT

• ACLU complains about:

• Section 215 allows the FBI to order any person or entity to turn over "any tangible things," so long as the FBI "specif[ies]" that the order is "for an authorized investigation . . . to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." 

Historical restrictions on liberty during emergency and war

• Alien and Sedition Acts (1798)• Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus• Sedition Act of 1918• Executive Order 9066• FBI surveillance, infiltration, and manipulation of civil

rights and anti-war leaders• The PATRIOT ACT• NSA Wiretapping

Discussion Question

• What principles should we use in order to guide us in balancing our desire for security with our commitment to individual liberty?