Interview With Congressman Robert B. Aderholt

I had the privilege of interviewing Congressman Robert Aderholt of the Fourth District of Alabama about the Constitution Restoration Act he has introduced. You can read the text of the legislation here. This legislation is an important one that Stop The ACLU endorses fully. We would like to thank Mr. Aderholt for the opportunity and honor of interviewing him about this.

1. What inspired you to host the Constitution Restoration Act (CRA)?

The cause of religious freedom has always been an issue I have had an interest in. One of the early issues after I got elected with was the Ten Commandments, and I worked with a lot of people who were working with the issues of supporting religious freedom. The Constitution Restoration Act was a natural outgrowth of the Ten Commandment Defense Act, which was the first piece of legislation I introduced dealing with religious freedom. Judge Moore is a constituent of mine, and I worked with him and talked with him and his attorney on religious liberty issues, and this legislation. We introduced it, and this is how I personally got involved.

2. Can you give a brief summary of the Constitution Restoration Act, and why America needs it?

Basically, the purpose of CRA is to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court and the lower Federal Courts of the United States.

It removes jurisdiction of the federal government from any case that involves the acknowledgment of God by a Public official. CRA allows each State to say for themselves how they want to approach the issue of religious expression and, in particular, the acknowledgement of God. I would argue that simply acknowledging God would be something the Framers would not want the Judicial branch involved in.

3. Recently there have been several lawsuits by the ACLU over City and County officials opening meetings with prayer, specifically ones in the name of Jesus. Where is the line drawn between “acknowledgement and endorsement” by government officials? Will this bill help to protect these government officials’ freedom to express their religion?

The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. The CRA takes the Federal government out of local decisions, when the acknowledgement of God is involved. This legislation would make religious expressions like Nativity displays to be left up to individual states to decide.

4. How has America gotten to the point that the First Amendment is actually being used to censor religious expression? What can be done to alter this?

A series of Court cases and activist judges over the last 50 and 60 years have gotten us to where we are today. Legislation like the CRA would help to clarify this issue. We have gone down a path that has become somewhat hostile to religion and the acknowledgment of God. CRA will try to reverse this unfortunate direction.

5. Many Americans are troubled that some Justices on the Federal Courts are using foreign law in interpreting the Constitution. Justice Scalia has been quoted as saying it should be an impeachable offense. Does this bill attempt to remedy this?

Yes, the legislation sets out in Title 2 which states that Federal Courts can not use foreign law. This reiterates and makes it very clear that foreign law of any kind other than English common law has no place in interpreting or applying the Constitution of the United States.

6. Can you explain the process in the Senate from the introduction of a bill to actually getting it passed and implemented? Is this bill likely to be passed into law?

Basically, any member can introduce legislation and ask for co-sponsors. From there, it is sent to a committee for review and to hold hearings on the legislation. In this situation, with CRA, since it deals with the judicial branch it would be the Judiciary Committee. They look at the bill, make any changes they would propose, and vote on whether or not to send it to the floor. Once a bill has been sent to the floor, it is then voted on by each chamber, and then sent on to the President for his final signature.

We can remain cautiously optimistic on whether or not the CRA will be passed in each chamber. We have had some action on the House, and Senate sides. I think people should contact their Representatives and Senators and ask them to co-sponsor this. Senator Specter should bring this up in the Senate Judiciary.

7. What are your initial thoughts about the ACLU? Do you believe that many of their cases are irresponsible and endanger America? What can be done?

My philosophy is greatly different from the ACLU. What is particularly alarming about the ACLU is that they do seem to be biased in the arena of faith in the public square. I’d be the first to say no to any kind of theocracy or establishment of religion. However, most Americans would agree we were founded on Christian principles. The ACLU goes too far with the separation of Church and State. I think most Americans would say there is a separation but…they go too far with the “wall of seperation”, when it comes to the acknowledgement of God by public officials, and public displays in the area of religious expression.

I believe they do have an irresponsible position in these areas, and that is not good for long run of the country.

8. Many Americans are troubled that attorney’s fees are paid for through their tax money to the ACLU in many cases in which they don’t support, such as suing over Ten Commandment displays, nativities, etc. Are you familiar with another bill in the House called the “Public Expression of Religion Act“?

Yes I am, by Mr. Hostettler of Indiana. I believe it has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. I don’t’ know about its progress beyond that. I think it is a good bill. It has a lot of merit, and one thing it does do is try to eliminate the chilling effect on the expression of religion. I think it is a very good piece of legislation. I hope the Judiciary Committee will move on it, and get this on the floor for a vote.

9. What is the chance of it passing?

A lot of members support it. I haven’t done a lot of research, but I definitely support the concept and know that several members of Senate would as well. Because there are so many pieces of legislation introduced each year in Congress, many members of the House and Senate are not familiar with legislation such as this. Their offices need to be called to let them know that this legislation has interest among those they represent.

10. Who do you think will be the 2008 Presidential Candidate?

I have not endorsed anybody, nor have I picked one particular person. Someone that is best with the particular issue of religious liberty is Sam Brownback, the Senator from Kansas. I don’t know if he is going to run, but he has done a great job on the issue of religious expression on the Senate side. I think that anyone concerned on this issue should take a serious look at him.

11. What are your thoughts on the NSA program?

I think that the President has to be very serious about what happened on September 11th and do everything possible to avoid it from happening again. I think wiretaps that deal with terrorist are perfectly legitimate. I think most Americans agree with the President- that we have to be tough on trying to get to the bottom of Al Qaeda. There are boundaries of the Constitution, but I think this program has been and can continue to be an effective tool to fight terrorism as long as it stays within those boundaries.

Again, I want to thank Congressman Aderholt for taking the time to allow us to interview him about this important legislation. It was an honor. Through the interview I learned how large the quantity of legislation is that goes before the members of Congress. If this legislation is important to you, you need to contact your Representatives and tell them to co-sponsor and support it. Don’t stand by and let the ACLU and renegade judges take your religious liberty away. Do something about it today.

Contact Your Representative. Contact Your Senators.

Linked at Mudville Gazette, Jo’s Cafe, Argghhhh, Pirate’s Cove, Basil’s Blog