[{"id":101634,"date":"2026-08-12T20:00:06","date_gmt":"2026-08-13T00:00:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?p=101634"},"modified":"2026-08-12T10:11:53","modified_gmt":"2026-08-12T14:11:53","slug":"constitutional-parental-rights-no-substantive-due-process-required","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/","title":{"rendered":"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

Editors’ Note: This article is a development of ideas the author has set forth in his previous scholarship, including his recently published book, <\/span><\/i>Taking American Citizenship Seriously: The Recovery of the Fourteenth Amendment<\/span><\/a> (Bloomsbury 2026).<\/span><\/i>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The cause of parental rights achieved a major victory this past spring. In <\/span>Mirabelli <\/span><\/i>v. <\/span>Bonta<\/span><\/i>, the Supreme Court granted parents emergency relief against a state policy whereby school officials would identify a child as \u201ctransgender,\u201d and then, without notice to his or her parents, begin calling the boy a girl (or the girl a boy). The Court found that this policy likely violated the parents\u2019 constitutional right to direct the \u201cupbringing and education\u201d of their children. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The decision signaled a victory not only for parental rights, but also for conservative jurisprudence more generally. Chief Justice John Roberts, setting aside his prior doubts, joined an opinion that reaffirmed the <\/span>principal holding<\/span><\/a> in <\/span>Dobbs <\/span><\/i>v.<\/span> Jackson Women\u2019s Health<\/span><\/i>: that the \u201csubstantive\u201d rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment are limited to those \u201cdeeply rooted in [our] Nation\u2019s history and tradition.\u201d Now there are six justices who have set aside the evolutionary approach to the Amendment (which garnered five votes in <\/span>Obergefell<\/span><\/i><\/a>) and expressly endorsed the fundamentalist reading.\u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But there is grave instability in the conservative position. As Justice Kagan noted in her dissent, the majority relied on a doctrine\u2014\u201csubstantive due process\u201d\u2014that Justice Thomas and other conservative jurists have often questioned, if not rejected.\u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Conservatives have good textualist and originalist reasons to shun \u201csubstantive due process.\u201d Any \u201cnon-procedural due process\u201d is a naked oxymoron. The Due Process Clause plainly indicates that the measure secures not <\/span>substantive<\/span><\/i> but only <\/span>procedural<\/span><\/i> justice. As I argue in <\/span>my new book<\/span><\/a>, when originally adopted, the provision secured a certain \u201cprocess\u201d that required a judicial process to determine whether there was good cause for a state\u2019s deprivation of a person\u2019s \u201clife, liberty, or property.\u201d Such causes <\/span>included<\/span><\/a> forfeiture, inability, or another\u2019s superior title (to property). The Clause did not, however, govern the <\/span>substantive<\/span><\/a> law, civil or criminal, that defined such forfeiture, inability, or superior title.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But conservatives need not abandon constitutional parental rights. The Fourteenth Amendment, as originally understood, not only <\/span>recognized<\/span><\/i> but also <\/span>secured<\/span><\/i> the right of the parent to the custody of his or her offspring. No legal fiction is required.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This parental authority is presupposed by the first sentence of the amendment\u2014the Citizenship Clause. That provision declares citizenship for all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction. Despite the recent discord, in <\/span>Trump <\/span><\/i>v.<\/span> Barbara<\/span><\/i>, as to the precise meaning of \u201csubject to the jurisdiction,\u201d all agreed or assumed that the child\u2019s subjection, or immunity therefrom, is mediated through the parents. If the parents are exempt from such subjection by diplomatic or other immunity, that immunity is imputed to the child. Conversely, if the parents are truly subject to American jurisdiction, the child is thus truly subject as well. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The child\u2019s relationship to his parents is thus prior to his relationship to the polity. This primacy of parental authority was axiomatic not only for our Constitution, but for our entire legal system. Three decades before the amendment, future Justice Samuel Nelson <\/span>found that<\/span><\/a> \u201c[a]ll the authorities concur on this point:\u201d <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The father is the natural guardian of his infant children, and in the absence of good and sufficient reasons shown to the court, such as ill usage, grossly immoral principles or habits, want of ability, etc., is entitled to their custody, care and education.\u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

By 1866, when the amendment was drafted, the rule still prevailed. The Wisconsin Supreme Court <\/span>explained<\/span><\/a> that upon the father\u2019s death, the child\u2019s mother became the sole \u201cnatural guardian\u201d of her child; therefore, there could be no \u201c<\/span>depriving<\/span><\/i> the mother of the care and custody of the child\u201d absent a showing of \u201cgood reason\u201d or \u201cjust cause.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But the Fourteenth Amendment not only <\/span>recognized<\/span><\/i>, but also <\/span>secured,<\/span><\/i> the anterior right of the mother and father. The basis for this right cannot be found in the Privileges or Immunities Clause. That provision manifestly secures rights of citizenship, but parental authority is a right, like the right to life, that belongs to the human person. Accordingly, there is, to my knowledge, no evidence that anyone, before the twentieth century, identified parental rights as among the constitutional \u201cprivileges and immunities of citizens.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Rather, it is the Due Process Clause that secures, albeit partially, these rights. The person\u2019s right to the custody of his or her bodily offspring was encompassed by the person\u2019s \u201clife, liberty, or property.\u201d Just a few months after the ratification of the amendment, the Indiana Supreme Court <\/span>declared<\/span><\/a> that \u201cto <\/span>deprive<\/span><\/i> the father of his right to the <\/span>custody<\/span><\/i> of his infant child,\u201d without notice and a hearing, was to violate the father\u2019s more general right to retain his \u201c<\/span>liberty<\/span><\/i> and <\/span>property<\/span><\/i>\u201d unless deprived of them by a judicial determination that \u201che has forfeited them by the standing laws of the community, and has had opportunity to answer such charges.\u201d And just two years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Illinois Supreme Court <\/span>held<\/span><\/a> that the Due Process Clause invalidated a state law authorizing juvenile detention without any judicial finding of either the child\u2019s criminal liability or the parent\u2019s \u201cgross misconduct or almost total unfitness\u201d\u2014a situation the court called \u201cdire necessity.\u201d The author of the decision, Anthony Thornton, had been a member of the Thirty-Ninth Congress that had proposed the amendment. The holding in that case\u2014<\/span>People ex rel. O\u2019Connor <\/span><\/i>v.<\/span> Turner<\/span><\/i>\u2014 became a <\/span>leading authority<\/span><\/a>. For fifteen years, the case was cited frequently, and though distinguished, was not challenged until 1886, with the publication of Christopher Tiedeman\u2019s <\/span>radical libertarian<\/span><\/a> treatise.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Constitutional parental rights are thus grounded in the original text and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. The parent cannot be deprived of the custody of his offspring absent a trial showing that he forfeited parental authority by abuse or neglect, or was incapable of caring for the child.<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

At the same time, however, this constitutional right is limited in three important respects. First, the right is limited to the \u201cparent\u201d in the original sense of the term\u2014the one whose body makes the child (parent <\/span>derives<\/span><\/a> from <\/span>parere<\/span><\/i>\u2014to produce, bear). The most precise formula is the right of the parent to his or her <\/span>offspring<\/span><\/i>. The right does not extend to those caregiver-child relations that were once called <\/span>quasi-parental<\/span><\/a>, as in foster care, etc.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Second, by its nature, parental authority is circumscribed by the equal natural rights of the child. The Fourteenth Amendment itself suggests this limitation. The Amendment presupposes 1) that the child, as a human person, must enjoy a certain foundational equality vis-\u00e0-vis his or her parents\u2014an equality presupposed by the Equal Protection Clause (and the Declaration of Independence that <\/span>inspired<\/span><\/a> it); 2) that such equality consists, in part, of the rights of \u201clife, liberty, and property,\u201d and the right to the \u201cprotection\u201d of the same; 3) that such equality must include the child\u2019s right to become a parent; and 4) that the child who is an American citizen has certain fundamental \u201cprivileges,\u201d including the right to travel, engage in commerce, and participate in the speech and general deliberative rights of the people. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequently, parental authority cannot include a right to kill, maim, or sterilize one\u2019s offspring, or otherwise impair the child\u2019s health or fertility. Nor can an American child be denied the education, especially literacy, necessary to the enjoyment of the privileges of American citizenship.\u00a0 Conservatives need not disavow state authority in these respects.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Third, the right secures the parent only against state deprivation of custody\u2014including temporary custody. Hence, <\/span>Pierce <\/span><\/i>v. <\/span>Society of Sisters<\/span><\/i> (1925) was rightly decided, and so too was <\/span>Mirabelli. <\/span><\/i>But the right does not forbid laws that do not involve the loss of custody\u2014e.g., laws prohibiting certain private education outside the home. Hence, the ban on foreign-language instruction, at issue in <\/span>Meyer <\/span><\/i>v.<\/span> Nebraska <\/span><\/i>(1923),<\/span> did not offend parental due process. For similar reasons, parental due process does not forbid public authorities, without force or fraud, from offering an overtly anti-religious curriculum\u2014as was arguably true in the recent case <\/span>Mahmoud <\/span><\/i>v.<\/span> Taylor<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Nonetheless, other rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment indicate that the Court reached the right result in both <\/span>Meyer <\/span><\/i>and <\/span>Mahmoud<\/span><\/i>.<\/span> The criminal law at issue in <\/span>Meyer <\/span><\/i>probably violated that freedom of speech <\/span>secured<\/span><\/a> by the Privileges or Immunities Clause. And the curriculum in <\/span>Mahmoud <\/span><\/i>probably violated the equality likewise secured by the amendment. As I elaborate <\/span>elsewhere<\/span><\/a>, just as the amendment prohibits racial taxes, it prohibits a creedal tax imposed on the citizen because of his or her religious or political beliefs. This prohibition extends to indirect racial or creedal taxes, in the form of racial or creedal discrimination in public expenditures. Even if nominally open to all, a decidedly anti-religious curriculum, like a racial-supremacist curriculum, would be so offensive as to amount to a discriminatory constructive exclusion from the public schools.\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Finally, the Constitution\u2019s protection for parental rights has broader implications. The child, by nature, has two parents. The security of this relationship suggests strongly the superiority of a certain domestic arrangement, where the mother and the father live together to care for their joint offspring. What Justice Kennedy feared <\/span>in his dissent<\/span><\/a> in the parental-rights case <\/span>Troxel <\/span><\/i>v. <\/span>Granville<\/span><\/i> is correct: constitutional parental rights reflect the \u201cconcept that the conventional [sic] nuclear family ought to establish the visitation standard for every domestic relations case.\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to <\/span>publicly favor<\/span><\/a>, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Image licensed via Adobe Stock.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to publicly favor, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":715,"featured_media":101637,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":"","beyondwords_generate_audio":"1","beyondwords_integration_method":"rest-api","beyondwords_project_id":"54010","beyondwords_content_id":"fca2eb8a-1a14-4206-a5fe-bc76f252ed38","beyondwords_preview_token":"fb9e4f1c-94a9-4a57-a6a2-91abdbaf78b8","beyondwords_player_content":"","beyondwords_player_style":"standard","beyondwords_language_code":"en_US","beyondwords_language_id":"","beyondwords_title_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_body_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_summary_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_error_message":"","beyondwords_disabled":"","beyondwords_delete_content":"","beyondwords_podcast_id":"","beyondwords_hash":"","publish_post_to_speechkit":"","speechkit_hash":"","speechkit_generate_audio":"","speechkit_project_id":"","speechkit_podcast_id":"","speechkit_error_message":"","speechkit_disabled":"","speechkit_access_key":"","speechkit_error":"","speechkit_info":"","speechkit_response":"","speechkit_retries":"","speechkit_status":"","speechkit_updated_at":"","_speechkit_link":"","_speechkit_text":""},"categories":[10,2506,11,597,2397],"tags":[],"coauthors":[403],"class_list":["post-101634","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-constitutional-law","category-courts","category-culture","category-parental-rights","category-parenthood-and-children","pillars-politics-and-law","pillars-sexuality-and-family"],"acf":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[1291,715],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"yoast_head":"\nConstitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0 - Public Discourse<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to publicly favor, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"David Upham\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"David Upham\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/c3514761f4ad5fed51d8cd118fe488ee\"},\"headline\":\"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-13T00:00:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1654,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Constitutional Law\",\"Courts\",\"Culture\",\"Parental Rights\",\"Parenthood and children\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/\",\"name\":\"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0 - Public Discourse\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-13T00:00:06+00:00\",\"description\":\"Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to publicly favor, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d\u00a0\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg\",\"width\":1400,\"height\":729,\"caption\":\"family of three\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101634\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"description\":\"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"width\":524,\"height\":179,\"caption\":\"Public Discourse\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/c3514761f4ad5fed51d8cd118fe488ee\",\"name\":\"David Upham\",\"description\":\"David R. Upham, J.D., Ph.D., is Professor of Law at St. Thomas University College of Law (Miami) and Senior Fellow in Politics and Law at the University of Dallas. His research and writing focuses on American constitutional history, and in particular, the history of the Fourteenth Amendment.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/author\\\/david-upham\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0 - Public Discourse","description":"Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to publicly favor, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d\u00a0","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"David Upham","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/"},"author":{"name":"David Upham","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/c3514761f4ad5fed51d8cd118fe488ee"},"headline":"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0","datePublished":"2026-08-13T00:00:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/"},"wordCount":1654,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg","articleSection":["Constitutional Law","Courts","Culture","Parental Rights","Parenthood and children"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/","name":"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0 - Public Discourse","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-13T00:00:06+00:00","description":"Indeed, because our Constitution recognizes the right of both mother and father to the custody of their joint offspring, that Constitution surely permits\u2014if not requires\u2014all the states of our Union to publicly favor, once again, the lifelong \u201cunion between one man and one woman as husband and wife.\u201d\u00a0","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_303932679-1.jpg","width":1400,"height":729,"caption":"family of three"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101634\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Constitutional Parental Rights: No \u201cSubstantive Due Process\u201d Required\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","name":"Public Discourse","description":"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization","name":"Public Discourse","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","width":524,"height":179,"caption":"Public Discourse"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PublicDiscourse\/","https:\/\/x.com\/PublicDiscourse"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/c3514761f4ad5fed51d8cd118fe488ee","name":"David Upham","description":"David R. Upham, J.D., Ph.D., is Professor of Law at St. Thomas University College of Law (Miami) and Senior Fellow in Politics and Law at the University of Dallas. His research and writing focuses on American constitutional history, and in particular, the history of the Fourteenth Amendment.","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/author\/david-upham\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101634","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/715"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101634"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101634\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101636,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101634\/revisions\/101636"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101637"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101634"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=101634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":101619,"date":"2026-08-11T20:00:48","date_gmt":"2026-08-12T00:00:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?p=101619"},"modified":"2026-08-10T11:07:00","modified_gmt":"2026-08-10T15:07:00","slug":"nolans-odyssey-a-shaky-middle-ground","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/","title":{"rendered":"Nolan’s <i>Odyssey<\/i>: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Too woke. Too conservative. Everyone has a <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/films\/2026\/07\/28\/christopher-nolans-woke-odyssey-conservative-fever-dream\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">take<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> on Christopher Nolan\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, and everyone is eager to share it.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">I won\u2019t offer you a take. For one, I don\u2019t think Nolan\u2019s filmmaking can be easily filtered through any given political lens. But even if one <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">could <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">convincingly give an account of how Nolan infuses contemporary anxieties into an ancient story, I don\u2019t think that\u2019s the most interesting aspect of this new adaptation.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Instead, I want to draw your attention to how Nolan handles the opposite process: not imposing the present onto the past but deciding which version of the past to catapult into our present culture. Whether consciously or not, Nolan promised us Homer\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, but he delivered instead Virgil\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. And that reveals a lot about the direction in which our culture is headed.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nolan can\u2019t help that some of the crucial themes in <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The<\/span><\/i> <i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">are ripe for contentious discourse in our political climate. It would be difficult, for example, for any director to make a film based on a story that heavily features sea travel through foreign lands without all kinds of commentary on immigration policy. However, what a filmmaker can\u2014and a good filmmaker <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">should<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014do is think carefully about how he or she depicts the past. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">When it comes to the story of Odysseus, the possibilities are plentiful. Homer\u2019s eighth-century BC text was already a reworking of an older, orally transmitted story about the Bronze Age, four centuries earlier. In the fourth century BC, four hundred years <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">after <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">the texts of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Iliad <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">and <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> were composed, Greek dramatists like Aeschylus and Euripides reinterpreted the stories of the characters involved in the Trojan war, from Agamemnon to Helen. In the Middle Ages, the Italian poet Dante Alighieri\u2014 who could not read Greek, and whose knowledge of these stories came from Roman literature instead\u2014included the character of Odysseus, using the Latin version of his name, Ulysses, among those condemned in hell. Rereadings of Homeric myth aren\u2019t new. They\u2019re part of what the literary critic Harold Bloom called in his seminal work <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Anxiety of Influence<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u201cstrong misreadings\u201d of previous texts. As Peter Leithart pointed out in a recent <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/firstthings.com\/classics-v-classics\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">response<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> to the <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">discourse, \u201cthat\u2019s what \u2018the classics\u2019 do: plunder, rewrite, subvert, and twist earlier classics \u2026 Western literature is more like a transcript of the struggle to exorcise the ghost of Homeric influence.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nolan doesn\u2019t tell any of these stories, though he borrows from many of them, and he has, of course, gone on record saying that he is familiar with at least one translation of Homer\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, Emily Wilson\u2019s. No, I believe the story Nolan is trying to tell is, at its core, that of another rereading of Homer: Virgil\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. And I think that tells us two things about our cultural moment: first, that our ethical assumptions are still much closer to the Christian tradition than we realize; second, that we have a deep-seated desire to reconcile those ethical assumptions with stories from our cultural past.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What do I mean when I say that Nolan\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">is really Virgil\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">? First of all, there is the obvious point that some plot elements are borrowed from it. The character of Sinon, for instance, is not present in either <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Iliad <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">or <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> but is instead borrowed from Virgil\u2019s epic. The assumption that the deception of the Trojan horse, which allows the Greeks to enter the city of Troy and raze it to the ground, is morally unacceptable is also entirely absent from Homer, but is at the core of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In Homer, Odysseus\u2019s role in devising the deception receives nothing but praise and is a source of pride for him. In Virgil, it is seen as a trickery that has no place in a just war. Virgil was, of course, trying to legitimize the rule of his own leader, Emperor Augustus, by tracing his ancestry all the way back to Aeneas, a Trojan who escaped the sack of Troy. It\u2019s not surprising that he would have depicted the Greeks as fraudsters and the Trojans as victims, but it is surprising that Nolan should follow in this tradition. You would expect him to have \u201csided\u201d with Odysseus, given that it is his story he is telling, after all, but he does not. Instead, Nolan picks out the Trojan horse as a source of war trauma and deep regret for Odysseus, even implying\u2014again, unlike Homer but like Virgil and, later, Dante\u2014that his misadventures in coming home are partly a punishment for his trickery.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This brings us to the greatest difference between Odysseus and Aeneas as heroes, and to my point that Nolan\u2019s Odysseus is really an Aeneas in disguise: the difference between \u201chubris\u201d and \u201cpietas.\u201d In <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the epithet that Aeneas gets called most often is \u201cpius,\u201d from which of course we get the word \u201cpious\u201d: he is dutiful and follows his destiny of traveling until he founds the future city of Rome even against his own heart\u2014for example, even when he falls in love with the Carthaginian Queen Dido. By contrast, Odysseus is called \u201cpolymetis\u201d in Homer\u2019s epic (meaning \u201cof many crafts,\u201d i.e., clever, resourceful), which is generally positive. But \u201cfandi fictor\u201d in Virgil, meaning \u201cthe maker of lies,\u201d characterizes him not as merely astute, but rather as full of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">hubris<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the Greek word describing excessive pride. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nolan does something fascinating with this contrasting characterization: he accepts Virgil\u2019s view of Odysseus as a prideful trickster, but then forces his Odysseus to change and become more like Aeneas, humbler and more dutiful. Such a change, of course, is hard to depict even in a three-hour-long film, and so Nolan has to start with an Odysseus who is already only <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">reluctantly <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">deceitful. Many of the less palatable aspects of his character are either reduced or eliminated altogether. For instance, Matt Damon\u2019s Odysseus is not shown spending an entire year committing adultery with the goddess Circe while his wife is waiting for him back home. His defiance of the gods is not overt but only indirect, and only prompted by grief over the loss of his men: in Homer\u2019s poem he tells the cyclops Polyphemus, whom he has attacked and blinded, to remember that it was Odysseus who defeated him\u2014which directly causes Polyphemus\u2019s father, the sea god Poseidon, to delay his journey home through shipwreck and to slowly kill all of Odysseus\u2019 men. But in Nolan\u2019s film, Odysseus merely shoots an arrow at the cyclops in a moment of anger, making him seem less culpable. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">His cunning is also downplayed. In Homer, he sends some of his men on a survey mission on the island of Circe, and those men end up being transformed into pigs. Nolan\u2019s Odysseus does no such thing; his men go of their own accord, and he acts the perfect hero when he eventually suspects something\u2019s wrong and rescues them. As <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">translator Emily Wilson pointed out in her <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lrb.co.uk\/the-paper\/v48\/n14\/emily-wilson\/an-uncomplicated-man\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">review<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the film, many of the \u201ccrafts\u201d that make Odysseus \u201cpolymetis\u201d are absent: \u201cHe does not build a marriage bed out of a tree growing in his house \u2026 The raft on which he escapes from Calypso is cobbled together from a few bits of driftwood\u201d (in contrast to the elaborate woodchopping and shipbuilding in Homer). <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The film also ups the horror aspects of the story. The cyclops Polyphemus, who is a man-eater in Homer\u2019s poem, sure, but who is also perfectly capable of holding a rational conversation with Odysseus, becomes a nearly nonverbal monster in the film. The more \u201ccomfortable\u201d parts of Odysseus\u2019s journey, such as when he lands on the island of the beautiful\u2014and welcoming\u2014princess Nausicaa, are completely absent. Circe, who in the poem is breathtakingly beautiful and has an incredibly easy time seducing Odysseus, becomes a sinister witch-like figure. Instead of a world of adventure, we are shown a world of bodily horror, because Nolan knows that adding this dimension is necessary to make us root for Odysseus\u2019s homecoming. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Why is it necessary? Because Homer\u2019s Odysseus, while a very <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">compelling<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> character, is not a sympathetic one by our own moral standards. Though we live in what is often termed a post-Christian culture, we are still in many ways culturally Christian. Most audiences are still uncomfortable with adultery, slavery, abuse, and anything that can be perceived as a war crime. \u201cMany of the film\u2019s implicit values,\u201d Wilson points out, \u201cdirectly contradict those of Homer\u2019s poem. Deception, warmongering, extramarital sex, cruelty to animals, abusing women and yearning for honour\u2014all perfectly fine in the world of Homer\u2014are, in this version, very bad.\u201d And when Matt Damon\u2019s Odysseus witnesses the sack of Troy, made possible by his own cunning, Wilson is right in saying that he \u201cgazes around in bewilderment and horror, as if he has never seen a massacre before.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There\u2019s nothing inherently wrong, as I\u2019ve argued, about retelling\u2014\u201cmisreading,\u201d in Bloom\u2019s term\u2014classic tales. It makes for interesting storytelling, but it should make us reflect on what new adaptations tell us about our changing cultural norms. My first impression after watching the film was that Nolan had taken a pagan hero<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">and made him a Chrisitan hero<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">who doesn\u2019t feel worthy of coming home until he has repented. Damon\u2019s Odysseus gives Anne Hathaway\u2019s Penelope a long speech about how he regrets his actions in the Trojan war, in which he does all but use the word \u201crepentance,\u201d a Christian virtue that is related to, but still distinct from, the Greek concept of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">metanoia<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Homer\u2019s Odysseus does nothing of the sort. Other <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/share.google\/LrVkPuy3yUVV1AJ4k\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">publications<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> have picked up on this apparent Christianization of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Odyssey<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">And yet, I think this interpretation still misses something. I don\u2019t think audiences are responding well because they wish for a return to the actual Christian faith, but rather because they are looking for a sense of purpose and for access to spirituality without the strictures of adhering to any actual religion. Once again, in this respect Nolan makes <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">into <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. While the gods and goddesses in both of Homer\u2019s epics are loudly present, steering the events of the war based on their whims, in Virgil\u2019s epic they begin to take a backseat. They\u2019re less wily, less unpredictable, less visible. Their will conforms to a more disembodied concept of <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">fatum <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(fate). As the late theologian Ronald Knox argues in his<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bloomsbury.com\/uk\/ronald-knoxs-lectures-on-virgils-aeneid-9781350118287\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Lectures on Virgil\u2019s Aeneid<\/span><\/i><\/a> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(which was reviewed in <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2024\/09\/95918\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Public Discourse<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), \u201cFate in Homer, if it has any moral determination at all, is uniformly cruel and unpleasant. Virgil, if he does not reach the idea of Providence, at least rises to that of destiny.\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Knox sees Virgil\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneid <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">as a link between Homer\u2019s culture and Christian culture. There is a sense that it is worth all the pain and struggles for Aeneas to submit to destiny for the greater good of founding the city of Rome at the end of his travels. Fate is not, ultimately, Aeneas\u2019s enemy, in the way that the gods can be for Odysseus. But neither is it Providence. There are many instances in <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Aeneid<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, most famously when Aeneas leaves Dido, when Aeneas struggles. You don\u2019t get the sense that he is led by a loving God who, in his Providence, is guiding him to the right path. Fate is less callous than in Homer, but only to the extent that it gives Aeneas a specific purpose in life, not in the sense that it provides him with anything close to true consolation. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<div class='sharequotebox'><blockquote class='sharequotestxt'>Very tellingly, Nolan\u2019s Odyssey ends not with Odysseus\u2019s triumphant return to rule Ithaca, but with his abdication to Telemachus and his decision to go on a self-imposed exile with Penelope to expiate his guilt about the war.<\/blockquote><div class='blockquote-share'><span class='s-options'><a class=\"cmsmasters_social_icon cmsmasters_social_icon_1 cmsmasters-icon-facebook-1 cmsmasters_social_icon_color\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer\/sharer.php?u=https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?after=2026-08-06T00%3A00%3A00&page=4&rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fposts"e=Very tellingly, Nolan\u2019s Odyssey ends not with Odysseus\u2019s triumphant return to rule Ithaca, but with his abdication to Telemachus and his decision to go on a self-imposed exile with Penelope to expiate his guilt about the war.\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fab fa-facebook-square\"><\/i><\/a><a target=\"_blank\" class=\"blockquote_tw cmsmasters_social_icon cmsmasters_social_icon_3 cmsmasters-icon-twitter cmsmasters_social_icon_color\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?url=https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?after=2026-08-06T00%3A00%3A00&page=4&rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fposts&text=Very tellingly, Nolan\u2019s Odyssey ends not with Odysseus\u2019s triumphant return to rule Ithaca, but with his abdication to Telemachus and his decision to go on a self-imposed exile with Penelope to expiate his guilt about the war.&original_referer=\" ><i class=\"fab fa-twitter-square\"><\/i><\/a><\/span><\/div><\/div>\n<p> <\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Nolan\u2019s Odysseus resembles Aeneas in that the gods are for him, also, less \u201creal\u201d people and more of an internal reminder to do his duty. Odysseus seems to take the advice of the goddess Athena seriously, for example, but it is also left ambiguous whether she\u2019s actually there, or if she\u2019s simply a psychological externalization of Odysseus\u2019s war trauma, a figure who exists merely to remind him to do his duty and return home.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">We like a hero who is less brash, less prideful, more obedient to moral laws than Homer\u2019s Odysseus. We like Aeneas, who, unlike Odysseus, doesn\u2019t seduce every available woman (and feels guilty when he does), and only reluctantly kills his enemies. We like him because we feel, instinctively, that it is right that he should believe in and conform to something greater than himself, to unchanging laws about human nature that it is disastrous to defy. In Knox\u2019s words, \u201cwe like him because he is in exile, not because he is a warrior,\u201d because he\u2019s the underdog. Very tellingly, Nolan\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ends not with Odysseus\u2019s triumphant return to rule Ithaca, but with his abdication to Telemachus and his decision to go on a self-imposed exile with Penelope to expiate his guilt about the war.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneas, just like Nolan\u2019s version of Odysseus, doesn\u2019t force us to <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">actually <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">believe in the Christian story. In a cultural moment marked by a renewed interest in Christian values, but not necessarily Christian doctrine, these characters provide a reassuring middle ground. They draw out and confirm our moral intuitions, but don\u2019t demand that we commit to actual religious practice. Just as there is a long tradition of viewing Virgil\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aeneid <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">as a pre-Christian story, Nolan\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Odyssey <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">is the post-Christian story <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">par excellence<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h6><em><strong>Image licensed <a href=\"https:\/\/stock.adobe.com\/images\/mosaic-scene-from-homer-s-odyssey-in-bardo-museum-tunisia\/41470645\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">via Adobe Stock.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Nolan\u2019s Odyssey is a post-Christian story par excellence. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? \u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2498,"featured_media":101624,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":"","beyondwords_generate_audio":"1","beyondwords_integration_method":"rest-api","beyondwords_project_id":"54010","beyondwords_content_id":"16562e8c-f037-4331-8cae-51b8780c3653","beyondwords_preview_token":"98c26b56-89a2-4cfd-83b1-0e6e3f615b21","beyondwords_player_content":"","beyondwords_player_style":"standard","beyondwords_language_code":"en_US","beyondwords_language_id":"","beyondwords_title_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_body_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_summary_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_error_message":"","beyondwords_disabled":"","beyondwords_delete_content":"","beyondwords_podcast_id":"","beyondwords_hash":"","publish_post_to_speechkit":"","speechkit_hash":"","speechkit_generate_audio":"","speechkit_project_id":"","speechkit_podcast_id":"","speechkit_error_message":"","speechkit_disabled":"","speechkit_access_key":"","speechkit_error":"","speechkit_info":"","speechkit_response":"","speechkit_retries":"","speechkit_status":"","speechkit_updated_at":"","_speechkit_link":"","_speechkit_text":""},"categories":[11,1208,19],"tags":[],"coauthors":[2372],"class_list":["post-101619","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-culture","category-fine-art","category-literature","pillars-education-and-culture"],"acf":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[1291,2498],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nolan's Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0 - Public Discourse<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Nolan\u2019s Odyssey is a post-Christian story par excellence. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? \u00a0\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Beatrice Scudeler\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Beatrice Scudeler\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6f4b24ef05156832e5e72a9489c0d202\"},\"headline\":\"Nolan’s Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-12T00:00:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2354,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Culture\",\"Fine art\",\"Literature\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/\",\"name\":\"Nolan's Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0 - Public Discourse\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-12T00:00:48+00:00\",\"description\":\"Nolan\u2019s Odyssey is a post-Christian story par excellence. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? \u00a0\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg\",\"width\":1400,\"height\":931,\"caption\":\"The Odyssey\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101619\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nolan’s Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"description\":\"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"width\":524,\"height\":179,\"caption\":\"Public Discourse\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6f4b24ef05156832e5e72a9489c0d202\",\"name\":\"Beatrice Scudeler\",\"description\":\"Beatrice Scudeler writes on literature, religion, the arts, and motherhood. Her work can be found in publications like The Critic, Public Discourse, Fairer Disputations, and Current. She lives in Oxford with her husband and children.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/author\\\/beatrice-scudeler\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Nolan's Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0 - Public Discourse","description":"Nolan\u2019s Odyssey is a post-Christian story par excellence. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? \u00a0","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Beatrice Scudeler","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/"},"author":{"name":"Beatrice Scudeler","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/6f4b24ef05156832e5e72a9489c0d202"},"headline":"Nolan’s Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0","datePublished":"2026-08-12T00:00:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/"},"wordCount":2354,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg","articleSection":["Culture","Fine art","Literature"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/","name":"Nolan's Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0 - Public Discourse","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-12T00:00:48+00:00","description":"Nolan\u2019s Odyssey is a post-Christian story par excellence. One question, however, remains: will this moral middle ground hold, or will we eventually return to a truly Homeric past? \u00a0","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_41470645.jpg","width":1400,"height":931,"caption":"The Odyssey"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101619\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nolan’s Odyssey: A Shaky Middle Ground\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","name":"Public Discourse","description":"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization","name":"Public Discourse","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","width":524,"height":179,"caption":"Public Discourse"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PublicDiscourse\/","https:\/\/x.com\/PublicDiscourse"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/6f4b24ef05156832e5e72a9489c0d202","name":"Beatrice Scudeler","description":"Beatrice Scudeler writes on literature, religion, the arts, and motherhood. Her work can be found in publications like The Critic, Public Discourse, Fairer Disputations, and Current. She lives in Oxford with her husband and children.","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/author\/beatrice-scudeler\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101619","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2498"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101619"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101619\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101627,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101619\/revisions\/101627"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101624"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101619"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101619"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101619"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=101619"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":101613,"date":"2026-08-10T20:00:23","date_gmt":"2026-08-11T00:00:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?p=101613"},"modified":"2026-08-10T10:53:10","modified_gmt":"2026-08-10T14:53:10","slug":"attorney-general-as-state-theologian-floridas-vaccine-mandate-and-the-freedom-of-the-church","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/","title":{"rendered":"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A legal controversy is brewing in the state of Florida, and it seems to pit the religious liberty rights of Catholic parents against those of the Catholic Church. <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nbcmiami.com\/news\/local\/florida-ag-uthmeier-warns-catholic-church-to-accept-vaccine-exemptions\/3841128\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In a July 31, 2026 letter<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> addressed to the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, the state\u2019s Catholic attorney general (AG), James Uthmeier, threatened to exclude diocesan schools from the state voucher program unless the bishops allow religious exemptions from mandatory immunizations. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because of the recent controversies over compulsory COVID-19 vaccinations in government, military, education, and industry, one may be tempted to think that the AG\u2019s threat concerns only those vaccines. But it doesn\u2019t. It concerns vaccines for <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">all communicable diseases<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> for which students in public and private schools are required to be immunized under <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.leg.state.fl.us\/statutes\/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=1000-1099\/1003\/Sections\/1003.22.html\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Florida law<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201cpoliomyelitis, diphtheria, rubeola, rubella, pertussis, mumps, tetanus, and other communicable diseases as determined by rules of the Department of Health.\u201d But there\u2019s an exception to the requirement. In addition to a verifiable medical reason, parents can opt their children out if the parent \u201cobjects in writing that the administration of immunizing agents conflicts with his or her religious tenets or practices.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/floridapolitics.com\/archives\/811454-catholic-school-parents-complaints-compelled-james-uthmeier-to-challenge-vax-mandate\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">According to the AG<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, his office has received <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201chundreds, probably thousands, of complaints\u201d from Catholic parents that the Catholic schools that their children are attending would not grant them religious exemptions. The basis of the parents\u2019 request is that the cell lines <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.chop.edu\/vaccine-education-center\/vaccine-safety\/vaccine-ingredients\/fetal-tissues\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">from which these vaccines originated were derived from fetuses<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> aborted in the twentieth century. Because Catholic moral doctrine maintains that the intentional killing of unborn human life constitutes unjustified homicide, and because the Catholic parents believe one would be effectively cooperating with an abortion if one takes the vaccines, they are convinced that they are religiously forbidden to allow their children to be immunized. This line of reasoning is untenable, however, insofar as it is contradicted by the authoritative teaching of the very Church to which these parents belong and that administers their children\u2019s schools. As the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/press.vatican.va\/content\/salastampa\/en\/bollettino\/pubblico\/2020\/12\/29\/201229c.html\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Pontifical Academy for Life affirmed in 2005 and 2017<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201c[A]ll clinically recommended vaccinations can be used with a clear conscience and that the use of such vaccines does not signify some sort of cooperation with voluntary abortion.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This is not to say that the Church does not recognize that taking the vaccines is fraught with moral tension because of their illicit origin. This is why the Church recommends, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC6699053\/?utm_source=chatgpt.com\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in various official documents<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, that one should seek viable alternatives to these vaccines if they are available. The Church also says that one has the right to refuse the vaccines <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">even if<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> there are no comparable alternatives, but <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.catholicculture.org\/culture\/library\/view.cfm?recnum=6539\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">if and only <\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201cif it can be done without causing children, and indirectly the population as a whole, to undergo significant risks to their health.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thus, according to the Church, it is not only morally permissible to use these <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">vaccines, it may very well be necessary under certain conditions. This is why the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.orlandodiocese.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/NationalCatholicBioethicsCenter.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">National Catholic Bioethics Center in 2011<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> advised the archbishop of Miami that \u201cCatholic schools or a Catholic diocese cannot grant an exemption on religious grounds since the Catholic Church does not teach that the use of vaccinations produced by cell lines derived from tissue from an aborted fetus is intrinsically evil.\u201d It was the AG\u2019s fierce opposition to this policy, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/files.ecatholic.com\/14111\/documents\/2018\/11\/Immunization%20-%20Policy%20310.pdf?t=1542643445000\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">as found on the website of the Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, that was the catalyst for his letter. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Even if Florida had no statutory religious exemption to vaccine mandates, parents would still have under the U.S. Constitution a fundamental right to direct the education of their children. (It is, however, not settled whether that right is capacious enough to provide a constitutional basis for an immunization exemption.) The Supreme Court has, since the early twentieth century, articulated this view in several landmark cases. In the 1925 case <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/268\/510\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Pierce <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Society of Sisters<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">,<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> in which the Court rejected as unconstitutional an Oregon statute that effectively barred parents from sending their minor children to private religious schools, the majority penned these famous words: <\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In 1971, in <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/406\/205\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Wisconsin <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Yoder<\/span><\/i><\/a><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">,<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> the Supreme Court, relying on <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Pierce <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">as precedent, vindicated the rights of Amish parents to remove their children from compulsory education after eighth grade. And most recently, in the 2025 case <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/24pdf\/24-297_4f14.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mahmoud <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Taylor<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the Court affirmed a preliminary injunction so that parents could excuse their elementary-aged children from required reading of LGBTQ+ books. Citing <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Yoder<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mahmoud<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> majority held that \u201ca government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses \u2018a very real threat of undermining\u2019 the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill.\u201d\u00a0 <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Consistent with the Court\u2019s rulings, the Second Vatican Council\u2019s 1965 Declaration on Religious Freedom, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vatican.va\/archive\/hist_councils\/ii_vatican_council\/documents\/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Dignitatis Humanae<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, affirmed that \u201c[p]arents \u2026 have the right to determine, in accordance with their own religious beliefs, the kind of religious education that their children are to receive.\u201d Thus, the Florida AG is correct when he states in his letter, quoting the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vatican.va\/content\/catechism\/en\/part_three\/section_two\/chapter_two\/article_4\/iii_the_duties_of_family_members.html\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Catechism<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201cThe Catholic Church has long held that \u2018the role of parents in education is of such importance that it is almost impossible to provide an adequate substitute.\u2019\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">But <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Dignitatis Humanae<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> also affirms \u201cthe freedom of the Church.\u201d According to the Council Fathers, \u201cthe Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom which her care for the salvation of men requires.\u201d This at least means that \u201cthe Church \u2026 claims freedom for herself in her character as a society of men who have the right to live in society in accordance with the precepts of the Christian faith.\u201d Within this \u201csociety of men\u201d is the Church\u2019s extensive network of parochial schools, with each institution under the ultimate authority of a bishop appointed by the Holy Father. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Something like \u201cthe freedom of the Church\u201d has found its way into several landmark Supreme Court decisions. The Court has long held that the government may not determine what constitutes heresy or orthodoxy in a religion (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/319\/624\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">West Virginia <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Barnette<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1943<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">; <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/322\/78\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">United States <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Ballard<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1944<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">; <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/393\/440\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Presbyterian Church in the United States <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial Presbyterian Church<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1969<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">; <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/24pdf\/24-154_2b82.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission<\/span><\/i><\/a> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2025<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. It has also ruled that anti-discrimination employment laws do not extend to the hiring and dismissal of employees performing ministerial functions (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/565\/171\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> EEOC<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2012<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)),<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/19pdf\/19-267_1an2.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Our Lady of Guadalupe School <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Morrissey-Berru<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2020<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). In addition, the Court has made clear that private religious schools may not be excluded from otherwise neutral state voucher programs on the basis of their religious beliefs and practices\u00a0 (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/21pdf\/20-1088_dbfi.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Carson<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> v. <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Makin<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2022<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">))<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, and that religious institutions cannot be denied public benefits solely because of their religious character\u00a0 (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/582\/15-577\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc.<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Comer<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2017<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">),<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/19pdf\/18-1195_g314.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Espinoza <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Montana Department of Revenue<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2020<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">))<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Because <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.leg.state.fl.us\/statutes\/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799\/0761\/0761.html\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Florida has a Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA)<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, couldn\u2019t the bishops argue that they should be given a religious exemption from the state\u2019s requirement that all schools grant religious exemptions from mandatory immunizations? Remarkably, AG Uthmeier dismisses that possibility, arguing that the bishops have no authentic claim to a religious exemption because, in his words, \u201cthe teachings of the Catholic Church do not require Catholic schools to compel students to take vaccines derived from the tissue of aborted children against the sincerely-held religious objections of their parents.\u201d He is, of course, technically correct, since no Church teaching is that specific. Yet by precisely the same logic, one can just as accurately say that the teachings of the Catholic Church do not prohibit Catholic bishops from requiring, as a condition of enrollment, that students at diocesan schools take those very vaccines against the sincerely-held religious objections of their parents.\u00a0 <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<div class='sharequotebox'><blockquote class='sharequotestxt'>If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.<\/blockquote><div class='blockquote-share'><span class='s-options'><a class=\"cmsmasters_social_icon cmsmasters_social_icon_1 cmsmasters-icon-facebook-1 cmsmasters_social_icon_color\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer\/sharer.php?u=https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?after=2026-08-06T00%3A00%3A00&page=4&rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fposts"e=If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fab fa-facebook-square\"><\/i><\/a><a target=\"_blank\" class=\"blockquote_tw cmsmasters_social_icon cmsmasters_social_icon_3 cmsmasters-icon-twitter cmsmasters_social_icon_color\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?url=https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?after=2026-08-06T00%3A00%3A00&page=4&rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fposts&text=If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.&original_referer=\" ><i class=\"fab fa-twitter-square\"><\/i><\/a><\/span><\/div><\/div>\n<p> <\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">But, in fact, the bishops\u2019 policy can be reasonably inferred <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vatican.va\/roman_curia\/congregations\/cfaith\/documents\/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">from several strands of Catholic moral teaching,<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> especially on conscience, cooperation with evil, and the limits of religious liberty. Because Catholic conscience is authoritative only when properly formed in accordance with Church teaching, a Catholic\u2019s claim to a \u201creligious exemption\u201d has doctrinal grounding primarily when it concerns conduct the Church identifies as morally impermissible. This is why the bishops cannot grant a <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">religious <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">exemption to Catholic parents, for it would imply that taking the immunizations would violate Catholic moral teaching. But as we have seen, the parents\u2019 belief is erroneous, and thus if a bishop were to grant the religious exemption he would be engaging in a performative lie.\u00a0 <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This does not mean that the bishops could not, in principle, grant a <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">conscience <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">exemption. However, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.orlandodiocese.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/NationalCatholicBioethicsCenter.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">as the National Catholic Bioethics Center said in its counsel to the Miami archbishop<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201cIt should be made clear that \u2026 [a conscience] exemption from immunization with these vaccines is being made in order to allow the parents to make a pro-life witness not because the Catholic Church teaches that the use of these vaccines is immoral in and of itself.\u201d Although the Church teaches that even an erring conscience must be respected, its claims are not without limits; those in authority are obligated to determine how the recognition of such claims <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vatican.va\/content\/catechism\/en\/part_three\/section_one\/chapter_two\/article_2\/participation_in_social_life.html\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">serves the common good<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201cAuthority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it.\u201d If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching. As the bishops\u2019 <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/files.ecatholic.com\/14111\/documents\/2018\/11\/Immunization%20-%20Policy%20310.pdf?t=1542643445000\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">own policy states<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: \u201c[T]he Catholic Church recognizes a parent\u2019s right to decide what is in the best interest of their child, so long as the effect of that decision only impacts them or their child. … The good of respecting the conscience of parents of a single child is outweighed by the harm which could come to many as a result of an exemption on the basis of conscience.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What is happening in Florida is striking. The attorney general of an American state, in his official capacity, is pronouncing a negative theological judgment on the orthodoxy of Catholic bishops. Armed with that judgment, he concludes that the bishops have no legal right to exercise their ecclesial authority to create a particular policy for their diocesan schools\u2014and that those schools may therefore be denied a public benefit unless the bishops renounce their heretical viewpoint and change their policy. We have a Catholic government official publicly entertaining legal action that would contravene both the teachings of his own Church and Supreme Court precedent on religious liberty. If Attorney General Uthmeier were wise, he would rescind his threatening epistle to the Florida bishops, issue a public <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">mea culpa<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> to them, and immediately seek confessional absolution.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h6><em><strong>Image licensed <a href=\"https:\/\/stock.adobe.com\/images\/close-up-medical-syringe-with-a-vaccine\/220120304\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">via Adobe Stock.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":405,"featured_media":101617,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":"","beyondwords_generate_audio":"1","beyondwords_integration_method":"rest-api","beyondwords_project_id":"54010","beyondwords_content_id":"3030f521-e516-489b-b121-abc4b54e9ff9","beyondwords_preview_token":"3c926895-e631-4959-886b-2132a04e334f","beyondwords_player_content":"","beyondwords_player_style":"standard","beyondwords_language_code":"en_US","beyondwords_language_id":"","beyondwords_title_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_body_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_summary_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_error_message":"","beyondwords_disabled":"","beyondwords_delete_content":"","beyondwords_podcast_id":"","beyondwords_hash":"","publish_post_to_speechkit":"","speechkit_hash":"","speechkit_generate_audio":"","speechkit_project_id":"","speechkit_podcast_id":"","speechkit_error_message":"","speechkit_disabled":"","speechkit_access_key":"","speechkit_error":"","speechkit_info":"","speechkit_response":"","speechkit_retries":"","speechkit_status":"","speechkit_updated_at":"","_speechkit_link":"","_speechkit_text":""},"categories":[10,2506,11,2529],"tags":[],"coauthors":[98],"class_list":["post-101613","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-constitutional-law","category-courts","category-culture","category-law","pillars-education-and-culture","pillars-politics-and-law"],"acf":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[1291,405],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0 - Public Discourse<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Francis J. Beckwith\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Francis J. Beckwith\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/bc1ec4996f7648537f6c457f9b9842a6\"},\"headline\":\"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-11T00:00:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1883,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Constitutional Law\",\"Courts\",\"Culture\",\"Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/\",\"name\":\"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0 - Public Discourse\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-11T00:00:23+00:00\",\"description\":\"If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg\",\"width\":1400,\"height\":933,\"caption\":\"Vaccines\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101613\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"description\":\"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"width\":524,\"height\":179,\"caption\":\"Public Discourse\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/bc1ec4996f7648537f6c457f9b9842a6\",\"name\":\"Francis J. Beckwith\",\"description\":\"Francis Joseph Beckwith is Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies at Baylor University, where he is also Affiliate Professor of Political Science and Resident Scholar in the Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR). In May 2025 he was appointed by the White House to serve on the Advisory Board of Legal Experts for the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission. His many books include Taking Rites Seriously: Law, Politics, and the Reasonableness of Faith (Cambridge University Press), winner of the American Academy of Religion\u2019s 2016 Book Award for Excellence in the Study of Religion in the category of Constructive-Reflective Studies.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/fbeckwith\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/author\\\/francis-j-beckwith\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0 - Public Discourse","description":"If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Francis J. Beckwith","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/"},"author":{"name":"Francis J. Beckwith","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/bc1ec4996f7648537f6c457f9b9842a6"},"headline":"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0","datePublished":"2026-08-11T00:00:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/"},"wordCount":1883,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg","articleSection":["Constitutional Law","Courts","Culture","Law"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/","name":"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0 - Public Discourse","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-11T00:00:23+00:00","description":"If the Florida bishops determine that immunizing their students is required for the common good, then their policy of mandatory vaccinations is, contra the Florida AG, supported by Catholic teaching.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_220120304.jpg","width":1400,"height":933,"caption":"Vaccines"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101613\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Attorney General as State Theologian: Florida\u2019s Vaccine Mandate and the Freedom of the Church\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","name":"Public Discourse","description":"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization","name":"Public Discourse","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","width":524,"height":179,"caption":"Public Discourse"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PublicDiscourse\/","https:\/\/x.com\/PublicDiscourse"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/bc1ec4996f7648537f6c457f9b9842a6","name":"Francis J. Beckwith","description":"Francis Joseph Beckwith is Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies at Baylor University, where he is also Affiliate Professor of Political Science and Resident Scholar in the Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR). In May 2025 he was appointed by the White House to serve on the Advisory Board of Legal Experts for the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission. His many books include Taking Rites Seriously: Law, Politics, and the Reasonableness of Faith (Cambridge University Press), winner of the American Academy of Religion\u2019s 2016 Book Award for Excellence in the Study of Religion in the category of Constructive-Reflective Studies.","sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/fbeckwith"],"url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/author\/francis-j-beckwith\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101613","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/405"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101613"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101613\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101616,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101613\/revisions\/101616"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101617"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101613"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101613"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101613"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=101613"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":101599,"date":"2026-08-09T20:00:45","date_gmt":"2026-08-10T00:00:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?p=101599"},"modified":"2026-08-09T13:10:08","modified_gmt":"2026-08-09T17:10:08","slug":"unaccountable-commissions-or-all-powerful-kings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/","title":{"rendered":"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/25-332_qn12.pdf\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Trump <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Slaughter<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the Supreme Court ruled that the president has the authority under Article II of the Constitution to remove members of the Federal Trade Commission. Compared to the Court\u2019s recent decisions about <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/25-365_4hdj.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">birthright citizenship<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/24-1260_g3cn.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">mail-in ballots<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, and <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/25-365_4hdj.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">transgender athletes<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Slaughter <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">may seem dry and arcane. But in overturning <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/295\/602\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ninety years of precedent<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and extending the president\u2019s removal power to so-called independent regulatory commissioners, the 6<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2013<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">3 decision will significantly change the way the federal government operates.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">For the majority, the removal power is essential for maintaining the Founders\u2019 vision of an energetic but accountable president. In <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Slaughter<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, Chief Justice John Roberts makes the eminently commonsensical argument that agencies performing executive tasks should be controlled by the chief executive: \u201cSubordinates who exercise the President\u2019s power are subject to removal by him.\u201d Practically speaking, without subordinate officers, the president could not enforce the laws. But without the removal power, the president could not fulfill his obligation, under Article II, to \u201ctake care\u201d that the laws be faithfully executed. Thus, the president must \u201cbe able to remove those who fail to live up to their duties, lest he fail to live up to his,\u201d Roberts concludes. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In defending the president\u2019s authority over independent regulatory commissions, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Slaughter <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">restores the electric current of democratic responsibility, making commissioners \u201caccountable to the President, and the President to the people.\u201d According to the logic of the Constitution, \u201cthe buck stops\u201d with the president because the president is elected by \u201cWe the People.\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In her dissenting opinion, Justice Sotomayor argues that the decision undermines the rule of impartial experts and unleashes an imperial presidency. For one, Congress intentionally created the Federal Trade Commission to be insulated from direct political control, equipping a bipartisan, multi-member body, protected from arbitrary removal, in order to \u201caddress complex problems.\u201d Citizens can and should debate the wisdom of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914, Justice Sotomayor admits; but since decisions like this \u201cinvolve sensitive tradeoffs and difficult judgment calls,\u201d she asks, shouldn\u2019t it be the responsibility of Congress, not the Court, to make them?\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Similarly, Justice Sotomayor warns that \u201cthe majority\u2019s theory of unitary, total executive control\u201d arms the president with \u201cunbridled authority\u201d beyond even the powers of the English Crown and, as a result, threatens to upend vast swaths of the federal regulatory regime with every presidential election. As Hamilton himself wrote in <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Federalist <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">No. 77, she notes, limitations on removal would prevent the \u201cviolent or … general … revolution in the officers of the government\u201d at every election. The Court, she worries, has put \u201cin the hands of a bold and designing man, of high ambition, … an instrument of the worst oppression.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">At bottom, the majority fears an unaccountable fourth branch of government, while the dissent fears the chaos of an imperial presidency. Both concerns are legitimate. Independent agencies have enormous behind-the-scenes power over the day-to-day lives of American citizens; and recent presidents, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/thedispatch.com\/article\/biden-legacy-lawlessness\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">whether quietly or brashly<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, have displayed near contempt for the rule of law in their attempts to enact their policies. Is there a path back to constitutional self-government? Is there a way through the waters between Scylla and Charybdis? Do we have to choose between a headless bureaucracy and a king?<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>How Did We Get Here?<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The story of the president\u2019s authority over the administrative state starts with the silence of the Constitution. As every informed citizen knows, the president nominates and, \u201cwith the Advice and Consent of the Senate,\u201d confirms federal judges and ambassadors, as well as directors of executive agencies (such as the Department of Defense or the Environmental Protection Agency) and members of independent regulatory commissions (such as the Federal Trade Commission). But does the president need the Senate\u2019s approval to dismiss (or \u201cremove\u201d) inferior officers from their positions? The Constitution does not say, at least not explicitly.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the First Congress, representatives debated the scope of the president\u2019s removal power in what became known as <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/teachingamericanhistory.org\/document\/a-debate-on-the-presidents-removal-power-the-decision-of-1789\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">the Decision of 1789<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Some argued that executive officers could be removed only by impeachment. Others reasoned that if appointment required the Senate\u2019s approval, then so too must removal: the power was \u201ctoo great to be safely trusted in the hands of a single man,\u201d warned Rep. James Jackson of Georgia. A third group contended that Congress could stipulate the mode of removal, since, after all, these executive agencies would be created by Congress. Finally, Rep. James Madison argued from the principle of democratic accountability: only when the president has the authority to unilaterally remove inferior officers can they be \u201cresponsible to the great executive power\u201d and \u201cthe president responsible to the public.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the end, Congress cleverly sidestepped the problem, saying only that when the secretary was “removed by the president,” certain duties would devolve upon the chief clerk of the department. For Madison, the clause implied that Congress was merely recognizing a removal power that is already present in the Constitution. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Fast-forward to the early twentieth century, when the Supreme Court issued a pair of decisions that asserted, and then restricted, the president\u2019s authority to remove subordinate officers. In 1926, in the 6-3 decision of <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/272\/52\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Myers <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> United States<\/span><\/i><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, Chief Justice William Howard Taft echoed Madison\u2019s argument. (He considered <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Myers<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> to be <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/openyls.law.yale.edu\/server\/api\/core\/bitstreams\/a17946ed-4993-4c50-a2df-c2b867cdb434\/content\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">one the most important<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> opinions of his tenure on the Court.) Since \u201ceach head of a department is and must be the President\u2019s <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">alter ego<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d in taking care that the law is faithfully executed, the president must have the \u201cexclusive\u201d power to remove them \u201cthe moment that he loses confidence\u201d in their \u201cintelligence, ability, judgment or loyalty,\u201d Taft reasoned. Therefore, President Woodrow Wilson did have the authority to remove Portland\u2019s postmaster. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">But in 1935, all nine justices, including those who joined the majority opinion in <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Myers <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">just nine years before, ruled in <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/295\/602\/\"><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Humphrey\u2019s Executor<\/span><\/i><\/a> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">that the president does not have the authority to remove officers who serve in a \u201cquasi legislative\u201d and \u201cquasi judicial role.\u201d The dispute arose when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt removed William E. Humphrey, a Republican troublemaker on the Federal Trade Commission, from his office, in clear violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. (Insulating the FTC from presidential control, the statute allowed removal only in cases of \u201cinefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.\u201d)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">But the Supreme Court ruled in Humphrey\u2019s favor, holding that the Federal Trade Commission was a new, hybrid creature, quite unlike a traditional \u201cexecutive agency\u201d like the one at issue in <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Myers<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. The FTC, it ruled, blended legislative and judicial powers, preparing reports for Congress as well as investigating companies and making recommendations to courts.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Humphrey\u2019s Executor<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> has been the controlling opinion on the president\u2019s removal power for ninety years: according to the Court, the president did have the authority to remove his subordinates in the executive branch but not members of independent regulatory commissions. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The decision allowed the seed of an unaccountable administrative state to take root\u2014and then spread like a weed. Progressives argued that the increasing complexity of modern political, social, and economic life required the rule of impartial experts insulated from the \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/teachingamericanhistory.org\/document\/the-study-of-administration-2\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">rigidly unphilosophical<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d public. \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/archive.org\/details\/administrativepr0000land\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Simple tripartite form of government<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d was deemed \u201cinadequa[te] … to deal with modern problems.\u201d The Constitution\u2019s system of separated powers needed to be altered. Modern problems required modern solutions. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt had hoped, the day of <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/teachingamericanhistory.org\/document\/commonwealth-club-address\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">enlightened administration<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> had arrived. It just wasn\u2019t accountable to him.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Neil Gorsuch\u2019s Constitution<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Following the logic of the Constitution, <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Trump <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">v.<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Slaughter <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">has redrawn the organization chart of the federal government<\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, <\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">restoring democratic accountability over independent regulatory commissions. The president now controls the personnel of executive agencies and regulatory commissions alike. But it will be a hollow victory for constitutional self-government, or worse, if it results in the executive, rather than commissions, unilaterally dictating policy. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Recently, under President Biden, the FTC tried to \u201cban nearly all employee noncompete agreements nationwide.\u201d Under President Trump, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission seemed to threaten the Walt Disney Company with legal action unless it disciplined late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel for comments he made about Charlie Kirk: \u201cWe can do this the easy way or the hard way.\u201d<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">For one side of the debate, these examples show that independent regulatory commissioners were not actually \u201cindependent.\u201d With the president\u2019s removal power restored, the American people can indirectly hold commissioners to account, they argue. But for the other side, these examples show the dangers of further politicizing the enforcement of the law. If the president now has the power to remove commissioners, what is to stop future presidents from weaponizing federal commissions against their political opponents?<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Enter Justice Neil Gorsuch. In his concurring opinion, Justice Gorsuch writes that \u201cwhile electoral accountability is a good thing, it cannot be the only thing.\u201d The decision, he warns, could result in merely trading a \u201cheadless fourth branch of government\u201d for an imperial presidency, Scylla for Charybdis. Executive agencies and independent regulatory commissions still create, execute, and interpret \u201crules\u201d that affect nearly every part of our lives, including \u201cthe airwaves,\u201d our \u201cfinancial markets,\u201d and the \u201cenergy market.\u201d In other words, they still exercise legislative, executive, and judicial authority. As Gorsuch writes:<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Open-ended delegations of legislative power have not gone away; now they will just be exercised by agency officials who answer to the President. The power to write new regulatory crimes still exists, but now the pen ultimately rests in the President\u2019s hand. The ability to judge disputes in-house remains, but now the house is white.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thankfully, the Roberts Court has been moderately successful in reining in the administrative state. At least in theory, Congress may not <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/295\/495\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">delegate<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> its essential legislative functions to administrative agencies. And under the major-questions doctrine, the Court presumes that Congress will speak clearly when authorizing an executive agency to take action of major \u201ceconomic and political significance,\u201d striking down President Obama\u2019s sweeping attempt to <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/21pdf\/20-1530_n758.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">shift<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> the electric grid from coal to renewables, President Biden\u2019s <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/21pdf\/21a244_hgci.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">vaccine mandate<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/22pdf\/22-506_nmip.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">cancellation<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of student loans, and President Trump\u2019s <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/25pdf\/24-1287_4gcj.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">tariffs<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Constitution separates the legislative, executive, and judicial powers into intentionally designed institutions in order to promote good government: bicameralism slows down the legislative process, promoting deliberation. A unitary executive is both energetic and accountable, since the buck stops with him. An independent judiciary is well suited for impartially interpreting and applying the law to specific cases. When each part is working as it was designed, laws are stable (since they require compromise and broad consensus), enforced with vigor, and interpreted fairly. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">On the other hand, combining these powers\u2014whether in an independent regulatory commission wielding \u201cquasi\u201d legislative and \u201cquasi\u201d judicial powers in order to enforce the law, or in the hands of an imperial president\u2014is, in James Madison\u2019s view, \u201cthe very definition of <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/avalon.law.yale.edu\/18th_century\/fed47.asp\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">tyranny<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government. In fact, now that the Court has brought the FTC under presidential control, it may be the only alternative to the rule of a king: \u201cLet Presidents exercise all those powers or begin subjecting them to the Constitution\u2019s constraints,\u201d writes Gorsuch. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Especially after <\/span><i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Slaughter<\/span><\/i><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the Court must remind these agencies and commissions of their proper role by asserting the limits imposed on them by Congress and by the Constitution. At a minimum, the Court must continue to strengthen its burgeoning major-questions doctrine and strike down rules promulgated by administrative agencies and commissions that overstep their congressional authorization. It will be a narrow road, a steep, uphill climb. To rephrase Winston Churchill\u2019s famous quip about democracy, the path might be the worst option \u2026 except for all the others. \u201cFrom here,\u201d writes Justice Gorsuch, \u201cthe only sure path is to finish the journey we start today and restore legislative and judicial powers to where they belong: in Congress and the courts.\u201d <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h6><em><strong>Image licensed <a href=\"https:\/\/stock.adobe.com\/images\/washington-usa-urban-cityscape-of-the-city-federal-trade-commission-600-pennsylvania-ave-nw\/211088470\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">via Adobe Stock.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1603,"featured_media":101604,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":"","beyondwords_generate_audio":"1","beyondwords_integration_method":"rest-api","beyondwords_project_id":"54010","beyondwords_content_id":"49600d52-38f2-4d7d-9318-e4f1def0b99b","beyondwords_preview_token":"00df8e07-6842-4ab9-bf1d-feacfc2d3354","beyondwords_player_content":"","beyondwords_player_style":"standard","beyondwords_language_code":"en_US","beyondwords_language_id":"","beyondwords_title_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_body_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_summary_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_error_message":"","beyondwords_disabled":"","beyondwords_delete_content":"","beyondwords_podcast_id":"","beyondwords_hash":"","publish_post_to_speechkit":"","speechkit_hash":"","speechkit_generate_audio":"","speechkit_project_id":"","speechkit_podcast_id":"","speechkit_error_message":"","speechkit_disabled":"","speechkit_access_key":"","speechkit_error":"","speechkit_info":"","speechkit_response":"","speechkit_retries":"","speechkit_status":"","speechkit_updated_at":"","_speechkit_link":"","_speechkit_text":""},"categories":[10,2506],"tags":[],"coauthors":[1286],"class_list":["post-101599","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-constitutional-law","category-courts","pillars-politics-and-law"],"acf":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[1291,1603],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0 - Public Discourse<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Joseph K. Griffith II\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Joseph K. Griffith II\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/3282fa27c0fc027dfd1d6683849c2e6a\"},\"headline\":\"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-10T00:00:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1989,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Constitutional Law\",\"Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/\",\"name\":\"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0 - Public Discourse\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-10T00:00:45+00:00\",\"description\":\"There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg\",\"width\":1400,\"height\":935,\"caption\":\"FTC\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101599\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"description\":\"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"width\":524,\"height\":179,\"caption\":\"Public Discourse\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/3282fa27c0fc027dfd1d6683849c2e6a\",\"name\":\"Joseph K. Griffith II\",\"description\":\"Joseph K. Griffith II is the William Blackstone Professor of Law & Society at the Ashbrook Center and an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Ashland University.\u00a0\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/joekgriffith\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/author\\\/joseph-griffith\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0 - Public Discourse","description":"There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Joseph K. Griffith II","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/"},"author":{"name":"Joseph K. Griffith II","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/3282fa27c0fc027dfd1d6683849c2e6a"},"headline":"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0","datePublished":"2026-08-10T00:00:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/"},"wordCount":1989,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg","articleSection":["Constitutional Law","Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/","name":"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0 - Public Discourse","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-10T00:00:45+00:00","description":"There\u2019s a way between the rule of an unaccountable bureaucracy and the reign of a king: constitutional government.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_211088470.jpg","width":1400,"height":935,"caption":"FTC"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101599\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Unaccountable Commissions or All-Powerful Kings?\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","name":"Public Discourse","description":"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization","name":"Public Discourse","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","width":524,"height":179,"caption":"Public Discourse"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PublicDiscourse\/","https:\/\/x.com\/PublicDiscourse"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/3282fa27c0fc027dfd1d6683849c2e6a","name":"Joseph K. Griffith II","description":"Joseph K. Griffith II is the William Blackstone Professor of Law & Society at the Ashbrook Center and an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Ashland University.\u00a0","sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/joekgriffith"],"url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/author\/joseph-griffith\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101599","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1603"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101599"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101599\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101606,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101599\/revisions\/101606"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101604"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101599"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101599"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101599"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=101599"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":101588,"date":"2026-08-06T20:00:16","date_gmt":"2026-08-07T00:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?p=101588"},"modified":"2026-08-06T11:39:59","modified_gmt":"2026-08-06T15:39:59","slug":"the-augustinian-state-of-social-conservatism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/","title":{"rendered":"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">It may sound absurd to suggest that social conservatism is in a stronger position in 2026 than, say, in 2010.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">No observer would, after all, look at our present moment and say that social conservatives won the culture war or are culturally ascendant. There are too many trendlines about American demographic decline, spiraling addictions in the form of online gambling, and the hollowing out of civil society to believe we are on the cusp of a social conservative renaissance. Nor is America more pious (though encouraging demographic data suggest that secularism\u2019s acceleration is waning and that a potential surge is underway among individuals returning to, or considering, faith). But from where I sit, and compared to when my career first launched, social conservatism is in a markedly stronger intellectual and cultural position than at any point in the last twenty or so years. And this is so without scores of victories to notch on our belt.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">In this essay,\u00a0<\/span><span data-contrast=\"none\">I argue that there are genuine reasons for optimism about social conservatism today, unlike in\u00a0decades past. At the same time, the movement faces deep obstacles that will make any lasting renewal difficult and contested. The moment is more promising than many realize. It is also more fragile. To borrow from Ross Douthat\u2019s\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/r_tv2mbWpX8?si=y_p9ikVLCMoQXV6M\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">analysis<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">, religious conservatism (of which social conservatism is a necessary species) remains \u201cconfident and dynamic\u201d compared\u00a0with\u00a0what Douthat names as progressivism\u2019s \u201cprofound internal crisis,\u201d that \u201c<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">a secular, hyper-individualist, utilitarian\u00a0ethos,\u201d<\/span><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0is not capable\u00a0<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">of \u201cinspiring humans to the most basic task of reproduction.\u201d To this\u00a0view, there is an Augustinian hue to our current moment\u2014a moment of optimism offset by ever-present challenges of living in a contested era of redemptive history.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Five arguments reinforce this thesis: 1) The progressive\u00a0left\u2019s overreach, particularly in the domain of gender ideology and sexuality, forced many otherwise normal citizens to question the viability of the broader progressive project; 2) social conservatives strengthened their arguments, which forced progressivism to reconsider its stridency toward its opponents; 3) the arguments social conservatives make are not confined to any one political-cultural setting but are grounded in timeless natural law principles; 4) social conservatives face a turbulent future as the forces of social progressivism will no doubt mount a counterattack, especially as inroads are made to normalize elements of social progressivism within\u00a0the Republican coalition; and 5) how elements of the secular\u00a0right,\u00a0postliberalism, popular support for abortion, and the uncertain longevity of the \u201cvibe shift\u201d challenge the viability of a socially conservative vision for America.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">To\u00a0establish\u00a0the baseline, let me return to the 2010s and progressivism\u2019s overreach. Readers may recall the vicious, offensive campaign waged by cultural elites to cast opponents of same-sex marriage as on the \u201cwrong side of history.\u201d Denouncing social conservatives was a\u00a0<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">cause<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0du jour<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0of mainstream progressivism. According to the progressive mindset, social conservatives need not be argued with\u2014only\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/vrk1R-3X9Hc?si=vZyXECpTv7P0r32R\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">sidelined<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0and scoffed at. Consider how a figure like Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich was forced to resign after it was\u00a0disclosed\u00a0that he had donated to organizations opposing same-sex marriage. Or Harvard professor Mark Tushnet\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/balkin.blogspot.com\/2016\/05\/abandoning-defensive-crouch-liberal.html\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">likening<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0social conservatives to Nazis. Ryan T. Anderson, Eric Teetsel, and I were even\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/03\/21\/us\/politics\/young-opponents-of-gay-marriage-remain-undaunted.html\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">profiled<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0in the\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">New York Times<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0in 2013 as a bizarre set of millennial holdouts who refused to go along with the cultural trajectory of our enlightened betters. Conservatives like George Will told us that all opposition to same-sex marriage was literally\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nationalreview.com\/corner\/not-dead-yet-ryan-t-anderson-andrew-t-walker\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">dying out<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">. Christians like florist Barronelle Stutzman and baker Jack Phillips faced intense legal scrutiny for refusing to use their creative talents for same-sex wedding ceremonies.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">I could list many, many more high-profile examples of the attempt to purge social conservatives from polite society. All told, traditional marriage proponents were cast as hateful bigots, and a massive campaign was undertaken to banish said troglodytes to the catacombs where they deserved to languish in irrelevance. Among many other things that could be said about progressivism\u2019s approach to the culture war, one thing is certain: The zealotry by which its arguments were made, arguments that required everyday Americans to accept patently absurd claims for fear of cultural banishment, exceeded the reality of where America actually was on certain issues. \u201cLove is love\u201d quickly morphed, in time, to \u201c<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.thegospelcoalition.org\/article\/evangelicals-obergefell-wrong-history\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">here, kid, take these hormones<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">.\u201d When having \u201cgenital preferences\u201d was marked as \u201ctransphobic,\u201d it was not hard to enlist those sitting on the sidelines of the culture war as active combatants. Yet a challenge\u00a0remains. James Wood has spoken of \u201creality respecters\u201d\u2014persons mugged by the zanier excesses of transgenderism. The challenge is that these \u201crespecters\u201d are more akin to \u201creality reactors,\u201d when\u00a0what we really\u00a0require\u00a0is true reality respecting, which requires questioning dogmas like no-fault divorce and the broader sexual revolution. Until these pathologies are questioned, social conservatism will remain only partially activated.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Second, declaring social conservatism in a stronger position requires articulating how that renewed strength is measured. Though not by the metrics I would prefer\u2014a higher marriage rate, fewer divorces, outlawed abortion, higher church attendance all around\u2014there is one key metric\u00a0I\u2019ve\u00a0observed\u00a0that explains why social conservatism has renewed vigor: The neutralization of strident opposition. One important\u00a0caveat, however: Even if social conservatism is in a stronger position, it would be an error to believe that the playing field is now even. A cautious observer may comment that the silliest elements of wokeism are merely in a temporary hibernation owing to the supposed \u201cvibe shift\u201d brought about by a second Trump administration.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Even so, if you pay close attention to the most pitched debates of the 2010s, namely, issues of sexuality and gender, you will\u00a0observe\u00a0much less bravado coming from the progressive mainstream these days. Reality has mugged many mainstream liberals\u2014Gavin Newsom and Bill Maher among them.\u00a0Perhaps this\u00a0d\u00e9tente stems from\u00a0progressives\u2019\u00a0considering these issues\u00a0now\u00a0settled and moving on. Still, I hardly ever hear accusations of bigotry and hate from the progressive\u00a0left as in the past. This is surely not because they agree with us on these issues\u2014hardly. But still, it is easy to detect on social media, especially from figures like Matt Walsh, a renewed confidence in making socially conservative claims boldly and unapologetically. What accounts for this renewed confidence aside from progressive overreach?<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">What has\u00a0happened\u00a0over the last six to eight years is what I will call the resurgence, nay, the revenge,\u00a0of reasonableness. In short, our arguments have proved\u00a0to be sounder than progressives originally considered. \u201cReasonableness,\u201d as I use the term, refers to whether one has a rational basis for the position one holds. It asks a simple question:\u00a0does the person have a sound reason for believing what they do? Is it a position that can be\u00a0established\u00a0by way of reason, evidence, and argument? Progressives of yesteryear were quick to challenge the reasonableness thesis. Today, I sense much greater caution in declaring the views of social conservatives beyond the pale of polite discourse. The fatigue of\u00a0cancel\u00a0culture may also explain the move away from unremitting\u00a0condemnation. My preliminary thesis is that the post-COVID cancellation era reached epidemic levels of exhaustion and unsustainability\u00a0even\u00a0in\u00a0many mainstream corners.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">A recent conversation I had\u00a0illustrates\u00a0this shift. I recently sat down with a law\u00a0professor\u00a0friend who happens to be very progressive; we each laid out our cases for what we believe about marriage. A decade ago, my friend may\u00a0have\u00a0been among those who threw around terms like \u201cbigot\u201d and \u201chate\u201d to characterize the motivations of social conservatives. But when I laid out my argument for what marriage is\u2014a comprehensive union of male and female oriented to reproduction and ordered by the norms of permanence\u00a0and exclusivity\u2014my friend replied simply: \u201cwell, that\u2019s entirely reasonable.\u201d I was\u00a0nearly dumbstruck\u00a0by this admission. For more than a decade, others like me were hectored and belittled as hateful throwbacks. My friend does not share my position on marriage, but he sympathized with my argument. In our cultural climate, I consider that a win, because it forces my friend to consider the depth of my argument rather than simply dismissing it with a simplistic denunciation.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233117":false,"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335551550":1,"335551620":1,"335559685":0,"335559737":0,"335559738":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Add to this the role that transgenderism has played in causing no small percentage of the American population to recoil at its claims;\u00a0they\u00a0are awakening from their progressive slumber to see that sex-denying ideology was a bridge too far\u00a0even\u00a0for\u00a0a laissez-faire culture like America\u2019s\u00a0It\u00a0has\u00a0led to a broader questioning of some of progressivism\u2019s extreme tenets.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Consider another telling\u00a0facet\u00a0of this debate that, I think, proves my case: The Human Rights Campaign\u2019s equality index has much less cultural sway. According to their own\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/reports.hrc.org\/corporate-equality-index-2026\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">report<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">, they have seen a 65\u00a0percent\u00a0decline in the number of corporations\u00a0participating\u00a0in their LGBT equality index. Part of this is likely because of the LGBT movement\u2019s general overreach, born of their belief in inevitable cultural victory. It does, though, testify to the reality that corporate America has\u00a0observed\u00a0what has\u00a0occurred\u00a0in the last decade and decided that acting as vanguards of cultural progressivism was not the\u00a0boon\u00a0they thought it would be. Is it any surprise, then, that we see corporate titans like Nike running wholesome, family-friendly\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.golfmagic.com\/tour\/open-championship\/scottie-scheffler-open-win-nike-advert\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">ads<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0featuring Scottie Scheffler holding his son on a golf course, declaring\u00a0he\u2019d\u00a0\u201calready won\u201d by simply being a\u00a0father?\u00a0Several mainstream corporations have returned to family-friendly marketing.\u00a0Perhaps that\u2019s\u00a0a cynical ploy just to get more money; yet it does signal America\u2019s return to some level of cultural sanity, a sanity that makes the arguments of social conservatives seem far more reasonable once the excesses of progressivism\u00a0had\u00a0washed over America\u2019s shores.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Third, all\u00a0these cultural signals draw on the arguments social conservatives have always made.\u00a0Perhaps at\u00a0first, the pace of cultural acceleration caught many religious and social conservatives off guard. Many faithful believers had\u00a0never before\u00a0had their convictions publicly\u00a0challenged\u00a0and their persons vilified. That allowed progressives to frame the arguments of social conservatives as little more than the decorative pieties of\u00a0finely dressed\u00a0bigots. But as time wore on, the arguments social conservatives made grew stronger. Consider how the argument for marriage, at first dismissed as a product of hate, was rigorously articulated by Ryan T. Anderson, Robert P. George, and Sherif Girgis in an\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2013\/10\/GeorgeFinal-1.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">original journal article<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0that, in time, became a\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/164177147X\/?bestFormat=true&k=what%20is%20marriage%20book&ref_=nb_sb_ss_w_scx-ent-bk-ww_k0_1_17_de&crid=38VZ2NF4WZPJQ&sprefix=what%20is%20marrige%20\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">book<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">. Sophisticated and clear arguments on the nature of our embodiment and marriage became more common:\u00a0that\u00a0our nature as human beings and what constitutes a marriage rely\u00a0on anthropological, biological, ontological, moral, sociological, and political truths.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Anthropologically, males and females are sexed\u00a0person\u00a0differentiated at the level of their chromosomal, physiological, and endocrine systems. Biologically, reproduction requires the coordination of complementary reproductive systems that rely on the union of male and female gametes. Ontologically, a marriage is present upon the mutual joining of the affective, intellectual, and embodied elements of male and female persons within a total and comprehensive union, a union that unites male and female at all levels of their being. Morally, we regard sexual actions as licit when persons express them within the confines of the marital relationship, ordered by the realities of enduring commitment and sexual exclusivity. Sociologically, children require caretakers to attend to their well-being, and so reason tells us that those who bring a child into the world bear an obligation of natural justice to care for their offspring. Politically, civil society and government rely\u00a0on the presence of human beings to populate the political community, thus making a shared, common life possible.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">While Catholicism has long drawn on the natural law tradition, evangelical co-belligerents are also sharpening their intellectual and rhetorical precision. In addition to\u00a0the increased acceptance of natural law in scholarly evangelical circles, I am now\u00a0regularly asked\u00a0to speak about the concept in pastoral and lay contexts. This was unimaginable a generation ago, as evangelical public theology, in the mainstream, was confined to its own theological ghetto and grounded in a narrow, proof-text-based approach to public ethics. It is not hard to argue that social conservatives are awakening to the need to engage in acts of\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/andrewtwalker.com\/what-is-religiously-informed-public-policy\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">public translation of religious convictions<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0and are in a much stronger intellectual position than they were twenty years ago. I\u00a0detect a\u00a0genuine\u00a0maturing of the socially conservative mind in matters of public translation.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">This reality speaks to the kinds of arguments that social conservatives need to understand themselves as making. We do not believe we are making ephemeral arguments relevant only to those who sit in church pews. We are not asking for the right to hold private beliefs. Nor are they relevant only to those who believe Scripture is inspired. No, the arguments we make are tied to human nature as it is. They are the kinds of arguments that are often unpopular with\u00a0the cultural\u00a0trendsetters but also stubbornly\u00a0accurate\u00a0in their diagnosis. They speak to ordinary realities inherent in human nature: the goodness of the body, the loveliness of a time-tested marriage, and the quiet, unshakable beauty of routine family life. A decade or more ago, we were told that these arguments were not only wrong but also animated by animus. In truth, the arguments that social conservatives make are eminently reasonable:\u00a0they have a sound basis in reflection on what the human person is, what marriage is, and what causes individuals and societies to flourish. Now, one may disagree with them, but to insist that what social conservatives hold dear is unreasonable is itself unreasonable. It feels, at least to me, that the average progressive now understands that belief systems stemming from millennia-old traditions cannot easily be dispatched. Hindsight, as the saying goes, is 20\/20. And it\u00a0is\u00a0in\u00a0looking backward that we see our arguments were right all along.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">The accuracy of moral propositions also requires consideration of\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">how<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0those propositions are communicated. It was the case a decade ago that progressives were viewed as championing persons (\u201clove is love\u201d) while social conservatives were stuck defending moral propositions. What social conservatives must do to stem this tide is not only to communicate the truthfulness and goodness of their convictions rationally and sociologically, but also to situate them within the domain of beauty. To supplant the regnant progressivism of modern America, social conservatives must forge a social imaginary grounded in the beauty of our claims\u2014that a dinner table with mom, dad, and children casts a more alluring vision than the offer of childless, double-income homes. One very practical consideration for social conservatives moving forward is to ensure that our public arguments present all three domains of truth, goodness, and beauty in unison.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">To the progressives who now give more pause before castigating social conservatives, I would simply like to say \u201cthanks\u201d and\u00a0hope they\u00a0continue giving our views consideration. To the erstwhile conservatives who saw a need to pivot away from culture war issues, or to call for a \u201ctruce,\u201d or who acquiesced fully to the demands of social progressivism in order to make themselves more palatable to the cultural elite, now would be a good time to admit you were wrong and rejoin social conservatives in our quest for grounding law and public policy in a true account of the human person.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Lest I sound Pollyannaish, I should note that part of this argument assumes a poor baseline. That social conservative opposition to surgical and chemical castration has more purchase today is evidence enough of just\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">how<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0bad things\u00a0really are. Regardless, the social conservative must reply that it is\u00a0by\u00a0pressing against the outer boundaries of our humanity that society collectively\u00a0responds\u00a0with a corrective whiplash.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">But for all the sea change in attitudes toward social conservatives, it is equally easy to show why social conservatism is weaker in 2026 than, say, in 2010. The future of social conservatism will be playing on a multi-polar or multi-theater\u00a0field\u00a0of action.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">First, social conservatives find themselves in a paradox with the modern Republican Party. The Trump administration is staffed with strong social conservatives. Even so, the Republican Party watered down its platform on abortion. And, mirroring broader public opinion\u2014even among otherwise pro-life individuals\u2014the Republican Party has no hesitation in advancing\u00a0in\u00a0vitro\u00a0fertilization. President Trump and Vice President Vance appear content with the wide availability of chemical abortion. The same administration that has commendably opposed gender ideology counts unapologetic champions of open homosexuality and sexual permissiveness among its ranks.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Second, add to the mix the rise of the so-called \u201cBarstool Conservatives\u201d who are championing pornography, fornication, ubiquitous online gambling, and general crudity, and there is an open question about what the future coalition of the Republican Party will look like in opposing progressivism.\u00a0Perhaps the\u00a0laissez-faire libertarianism of the\u00a0Barstoolers\u00a0is less likely to regard social conservatives as unreconstructed bigots, but the tension will persist. Closely related to this more libertarian approach are the vanguards of the \u201cTech Bro\u201d center-right that are effectively transhumanists.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Third,\u00a0postliberalism\u00a0(and how we define that is open to discussion, since many reading this may sympathize with its various pillars) is aided and abetted by many precincts on the political right. My comments here are not aimed at people like Patrick Deneen, whose\u00a0postliberalism\u00a0is far less radical than other proposals currently being floated. These more radical voices look askance at the Constitution, question America\u2019s founding, challenge core civil liberties (such as religious liberty and women\u2019s right to vote), and now embrace in varying shades a blood-and-soil\/throne-and-altar ethnocentrism with troubling fixations on race. The challenge\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0postliberalism\u00a0vector is that most, if not all,\u00a0postliberals\u00a0embrace social conservatism. While the tenets of\u00a0postliberalism\u00a0are indeed a challenge to a vision of social conservatism defined within the American tradition, the overarching problem is not any near-future enactment of its proposals (there is virtually no actual political will wishing to repeal or revise the First or Nineteenth Amendment) but\u00a0postliberalism\u2019s\u00a0awful branding\u2014provocative and often fringe voices offer\u00a0edgelord proposals attractive to few outside its small chorus of online echo chambers.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Fourth, we must also question how long this \u201cvibe shift\u201d will persist. Ben Shapiro\u00a0has\u00a0predicted that once progressives come back to power, it is likely that the country will swing back to the\u00a0left. Whether institutions like Harvard have truly learned their lesson in promoting intellectual diversity and opposing antisemitism\u00a0remains\u00a0an open question.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233117":false,"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335551550":1,"335551620":1,"335559685":0,"335559737":0,"335559738":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Here, then, is the climax of my argument: Social conservatism finds itself in an Augustinian moment. By \u201cAugustinian,\u201d I mean a fragmented and tension-laden state buffeted, simultaneously, by optimism and challenge.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">But Augustine would also warn that cultural permissiveness is not merely a political problem \u201cout there\u201d;\u00a0it is the public expression of disordered loves that also tempt the conservative soul. It is a sustained assault on\u2014and amplification of\u2014the fallen self\u2019s disordered loves. A society that prizes autonomy, appetite, and self-invention is not simply confused at the level of policy; no, it is seeking rest in the self rather than in God.\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">Yet the conservative response can itself become another form of the same disease if it is ordered merely toward resentment, power, nostalgia, or total conquest (which Christian eschatology should warn us against). The conflict is finally not between \u201cour side\u201d and \u201ctheir side,\u201d but between rival loves: the love of God that orders freedom toward truth, sacrifice, and rightly ordered desire, and the love of self that turns liberty into license. Thus, the task for social conservatives is to labor for cultural renewal with courage;\u00a0to defend moral order without imagining that politics can redeem the human heart; and to remember that the deepest crisis of permissive culture is not that it loves too much, but that it loves lesser things (and wrong things) as though they were ultimate.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">What stands as a present opportunity is seeing how progressivism\u00a0actually vindicates\u00a0the claims of social conservatives. The excesses of progressivism often function as unintended confirmations and vindications of social conservative claims. We judge a worldview not only by whether its propositions are true, but by what happens when those propositions are rejected. False worldviews create false worlds. And over time, the disorder they produce becomes evidence for the truths they try\u2014futilely,\u00a0we should note\u2014to suppress.<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0The unknown at present is whether a society so lamentably far adrift can don the requisite ears to hear and eyes to see at this present civilizational moment. And so, I join in agreement with Douthat\u2019s view that amid this \u201cfractured group of rivals\u00a0\u2026\u00a0there\u2019s absolutely no reason to think that religious humanism can’t contend equally for influence.\u201d At this late hour, secular progressivism lacks the internal resources to sustain itself as a social ethic, and so social conservatives have a unique opportunity to reassert the timelessness of a Permanent Things conservatism.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">As time has worn on, though, what social conservatives warned about has come home to roost. And this explains why social conservatism is neither culturally ascendant nor entirely vanquished. Marriage and fertility rates have fallen to historically low levels. Abortion\u00a0remains\u00a0strikingly popular in public opinion (<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.christiandaily.com\/news\/us-churchgoers-pro-life-conviction-plummets-by-20-points-in-two-years-new-study-reveals\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">even among churchgoers<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">). Even so, the arguments that social conservatives make remain as true as ever. And that, oddly enough, explains the role of social conservatives in American culture: To be mocked, and then vindicated. That\u00a0vindication\u00a0arises not from a settled confidence that we are guaranteed victory in the present. It is understood through an eschatological horizon in the likes of G.\u00a0K. Chesterton\u2019s quip: \u201c<\/span><span data-contrast=\"none\">The one perfectly divine thing, the one glimpse of God\u2019s paradise given on earth, is to fight a losing battle\u2014and not lose it.\u201d<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{"134233118":false,"201341983":0,"335559731":0,"335559739":160,"335559740":276}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h6><em><strong>Image licensed <a href=\"https:\/\/stock.adobe.com\/images\/conservatism-being-studied-examined-under-close-inspection-most-important-subjects-and-ideas-closely-related-to-conservatism-3d-illustration\/1082362845\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">via Adobe Stock.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/h6>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":589,"featured_media":101592,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":"","beyondwords_generate_audio":"1","beyondwords_integration_method":"rest-api","beyondwords_project_id":"54010","beyondwords_content_id":"bb8174f2-3773-4024-8489-514e4538806b","beyondwords_preview_token":"8fcf8fa2-4802-42e6-bf06-a5fd6408eb6f","beyondwords_player_content":"","beyondwords_player_style":"standard","beyondwords_language_code":"en_US","beyondwords_language_id":"","beyondwords_title_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_body_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_summary_voice_id":"8540","beyondwords_error_message":"","beyondwords_disabled":"","beyondwords_delete_content":"","beyondwords_podcast_id":"","beyondwords_hash":"","publish_post_to_speechkit":"","speechkit_hash":"","speechkit_generate_audio":"","speechkit_project_id":"","speechkit_podcast_id":"","speechkit_error_message":"","speechkit_disabled":"","speechkit_access_key":"","speechkit_error":"","speechkit_info":"","speechkit_response":"","speechkit_retries":"","speechkit_status":"","speechkit_updated_at":"","_speechkit_link":"","_speechkit_text":""},"categories":[1199,11,744],"tags":[],"coauthors":[277],"class_list":["post-101588","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-conservatism","category-culture","category-long-reads","pillars-education-and-culture"],"acf":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[1291,589],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0 - Public Discourse<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Andrew T. Walker\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Andrew T. Walker\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/306e163fbd48bb6c491625b54c18a170\"},\"headline\":\"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-07T00:00:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3703,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Conservatism\",\"Culture\",\"Long Reads\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0 - Public Discourse\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-07T00:00:16+00:00\",\"description\":\"An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0\u00a0\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg\",\"width\":1400,\"height\":933,\"caption\":\"conservatism\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/101588\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"description\":\"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Public Discourse\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/07\\\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png\",\"width\":524,\"height\":179,\"caption\":\"Public Discourse\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/PublicDiscourse\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/306e163fbd48bb6c491625b54c18a170\",\"name\":\"Andrew T. Walker\",\"description\":\"Andrew T. Walker serves as Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also a fellow with The Ethics and Public Policy Center.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\\\/author\\\/andrew-t-walker\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0 - Public Discourse","description":"An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0\u00a0","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Andrew T. Walker","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/"},"author":{"name":"Andrew T. Walker","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/306e163fbd48bb6c491625b54c18a170"},"headline":"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0","datePublished":"2026-08-07T00:00:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/"},"wordCount":3703,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg","articleSection":["Conservatism","Culture","Long Reads"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/","name":"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0 - Public Discourse","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-07T00:00:16+00:00","description":"An Augustinian reading of the present moment would help social conservatives resist both triumphalism and despair. The renewal and invigoration now visible among many social conservatives may be a genuine mercy: a sign that the moral imagination\u2014worn down though it is by the exhaustion of ambient progressivism\u2014has not been entirely extinguished, and that many still perceive the disorder produced when freedom is detached from truth, embodiment, family, duty, and the created order.\u00a0\u00a0","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/AdobeStock_1082362845-1.jpg","width":1400,"height":933,"caption":"conservatism"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/2026\/08\/101588\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Augustinian State of Social Conservatism\u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","name":"Public Discourse","description":"The online journal of The Witherspoon Institute","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#organization","name":"Public Discourse","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/WIS-PD-AltLogo-FULL-Website.png","width":524,"height":179,"caption":"Public Discourse"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/PublicDiscourse\/","https:\/\/x.com\/PublicDiscourse"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/#\/schema\/person\/306e163fbd48bb6c491625b54c18a170","name":"Andrew T. Walker","description":"Andrew T. Walker serves as Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also a fellow with The Ethics and Public Policy Center.","url":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/author\/andrew-t-walker\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101588","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/589"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101588"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101588\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":101590,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101588\/revisions\/101590"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/101592"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101588"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101588"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101588"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepublicdiscourse.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=101588"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}]