Can Conservatives Uphold The US Constitution While Backing Israel?
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”- Sixth Amendment The Constitution of the United States of America.
Throughout time, the right to a fair and speedy trial has been the cornerstone of any free nation. When the accused is given the ability to consult counsel, formulate a defense of themselves, and face their accuser in an unbiased trial of their peers, that is the sign we are in a truly free society. The bare minimum for a system to be considered just.
Our founding fathers recognized the necessity of this as they faced down the barrel of tyranny. While some people claim the foundation of our country was built around resisting taxes, the reality is that it came in resistance to a broad range of tyranny. When the Intolerable Acts were passed by the British government, justice was largely set aside as Britain attempted to control its defiant colonists.
Laws such as the Administration of Justice Act became the catalyst for one of the biggest changes in history. Commonly referred to as the Murder Act, the Sixth Amendment was written largely because of this. Britain allowed murders committed by their officers to be tried only in British courts, rather than a local colonial court. Creating a distinct bias that citizens recognized as effectively legalizing murder by the British military.
Imagine the disgust our founding fathers would feel looking at the military courts established by Israel. Courts where the prosecution is legally allowed to request a prohibition. This is a period of sixty days which the defendant is barred from conferring with their legal team. Two whole months barred from talking to your lawyer while the prosecutors are allowed to continue interrogating you.
In the United States, under our constitution, the very act of denying a defendant the right to speak with their lawyer would guarantee a mistrial. Malicious prosecutorial misconduct would be one of the accusations leveled on whatever prosecutor had their hands on the case. Disbarment would be discussed in the aftermath.
Still, those who stand beneath the banner of the conservative rally to Israel’s side. Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and House leader of the Republican Party, declares himself to be conservative. His website lists the 7 core principles of conservatism as Johnson defined them. Among them are individual freedom, Limited Government, the Rule of Law, and Human Dignity.
I fancy myself as a conservative personally. Firm believer that the Second Amendment is our most important amendment. The United States Constitution is arguably the greatest document ever written, and I firmly believe that true capitalism is the greatest economic system.
Despite my personal views, I find myself, like many Americans, struggling to justify support for Israel. How do military trials, where defendants can be denied access to their lawyers for months at a time, align with limited government? Individual freedom? The sixth amendment of our constitution?
In response to colonial resistance, the British government issued the Quartering Act. This allowed the British military to seize land, invade people's homes, take their food, clothes, and whatever the soldier deemed as necessary. In response, once independence had been achieved, the founders wrote the Fifth Amendment of our Constitution.
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”- Fifth Amendment The Constitution of the United States.
On June 25, the IDF’s Civil Administration declared they were seizing 3,128 acres of land in the occupied West Bank. Miami is 35,000 acres. The Israeli military seized nearly a tenth of Miami with no compensation to the people who were already there.
Again, I find myself at odds with these actions. I look towards our constitution, and I know that the things they are doing are tyrannical. Further, I look towards the words of men who stood directly against tyranny, and my heart tells me that they are wrong for what they are doing.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”-Benjamin Franklin.
Truly, our founding fathers knew that regardless of the situation, surrendering the rights afforded to us by God and enumerated within our Constitution was not acceptable. Because of this, I find myself looking at men I once considered to be conservatives and questioning whether they belong beside me under that banner. How can they while also supporting such blatant tyranny?
“Don't tread on me”, was the declaration of our nation. “Give me liberty or give me death.” Those were the words on the lips of the men who wrote our constitution. The greatest legal framework that has ever been written for a nation was written by men who saw tyranny in their faces, who were labeled as traitors and rebels.
Yet now we watch unfazed as the very rights we believe are granted by God are stripped away by men. Conservatives, by and large, cheer for the IDF with some of the most influential conservatives calling for Israel to “finish the job”. How can you reconcile their actions with our belief in our constitution?
The simple answer is that a person cannot. Either you are a conservative who supports the U.S. Constitution and believes firmly in a smaller government, or you support Israel. You cannot do both of those things at the same time, given the actions Israel has committed in the last two years.
On November 21st 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. For the war crime of starvation as a method of war, and for crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.
The International Criminal Court found sufficient evidence to charge them with starvation as a method of war. Making people go hungry until they die sounds like it ignores human dignity. Certainly ignores the value of individual freedom and limited government.
I ask anyone who claims to be conservative to explain to me how these behaviors align with our standards as Americans. Because from my viewpoint, they are in direct conflict with our constitution.
Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.
 | A guest post by
|
I admire that you are willing to question the actions of "your side", John, but I think you're getting caught up in an unsuitable comparison. Israel is our ally, but it is not, nor has it ever been, the United States, or had our Constitution. We are technically politically allied with Pakistan as well, but they certainly have policies which would be rejected - if not looked upon as criminal - here. If we held every ally to our standards, we'd have no allies.
Also, Colonial America and contemporary Israel are vastly different scenarios. I understand your observation about holding fast to your principles even (and sometimes especially) in the face of adversity. But Israel has been on a life raft in the middle of an ocean, besieged since its inception by the surrounding sharks. That has necessitated many creative, outside-the-box approaches to maintaining their survival as a people. While I'm not saying I agree with everything Israel does or has done, none of us are in their shoes to legitimately criticize their actions.
Aside from some early settlement activity (not that they had any choice after the Shoah), everything which has been suffered by Arabs at the hands of Israelis could have been prevented by simply accepting their existence. Instead, they chose hatred.
Israel does what it feels it has to do, whether you or I or anyone else thinks differently. That shouldn't make them any less our ally.
ZL
I'm rather tired of this double standard that so many apply to Israel. If it's not absolutely perfect it's not worth having as an ally? Genocide or terrorists getting nukes is fine if our allies don't have the same laws we do? THAT is your argument?
The US is the ONLY nation on this planet which has the U.S. Constitution, yet I don't recall any articles here using our Constitution as the measure of whether we ought to support Ukraine, or Taiwan, or for that matter NATO or any country we've offered defensive assistance to in the face of aggression. It certainly wasn't applied to any of our allies in any previous war and we haven't turned our noses up at anyone who's assisted us before or currently. Last I heard, Israel is the ONLY democracy in the Middle East, it's utterly indisputable they were attacked first, and even here normal legal standards for citizens do NOT apply to enemy combatants in a time of war.
Understand this: Israel is our ally. Their support is essential to our own interests in the region. They are fighting and dying to deal with one of our mutual enemies who has engaged in outright terrorism, war crimes, and attempted genocide. So your response is to quibble about their legal practices? Don't you fricken dare try to hide your antisemitism behind your misinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution and call that Conservatism you bigot. Our foreign policy is being determined by those officials we have appointed to do so, in furtherance of our national interests, according to our Constitution.