Fred's Running!

Everyone knows that he's running, of course, and I've been supportive because of what he has had to say. The announcement over here emphasizes:

• the importance of federalism
• free markets
• that the Constitution is not an outdated document
• that human rights are God-given, not a grant from the government
• that no one's life is below the protection of the law
• that judges should be interpreting the Constitution, not twisting it to fit their model
• winning the War on Terrorism

It is important to recognize that abiding by the Constitutional principle of federalism sometimes means that you don't get what you want everywhere. For example, as much as many pro-life Americans want abortion to be prohibited, a respect for federalism means that the decision about such laws will be a state by state matter. Unless there is a clear Constitutional protection of an individual right that is imposed on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment (such as freedom of speech, of the press, prohibition of an establishment of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments), this means that we have to allow the states (through either their legislature or the initiative process) to make their own laws.

Let me give you an example. Some years ago, when Republicans in Congress were proposing to ban partial-birth abortion, my first reaction was, "That's okay with me." But Instapundit (who at the time was still just an obscure Tennessee law professor) wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal pointing out that this was contrary to federalism, because it proposed to take away the authority of the states to make this decision.

I found that a very persuasive argument--very much like the argument that the states should be free to either allow, regulate, or even ban abortion, as was the case before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade (1973). Of course, Congress could pass a ban that applied only to federal territories, the District of Columbia, military hospitals. (I've never been terribly impressed with the use of interstate commerce regulatory authority to justify banning actions that take place entirely within one state, even when I agreed that the action was a bad idea.)

Some states will continue to allow abortion on demand; most will not. Some states will make homosexuality a crime; most will not. A few states will recognize same-sex marriage; most will not. If you don't like the particular policy decisions that your state makes, moving isn't so difficult.

In some cases, the different laws of different states will reflect genuine differences in the conditions and needs of the people. In other cases, states will make mistakes, but with fifty laboratories, those errors will become obvious over time.