Justice Clarence Thomas, Harry Jaffa, and the Declaration of Independence

Justice Clarence Thomas recently discussed the Declaration of Independence at the University of Texas, suggesting it embodies ideals of equality and could be seen as an antislavery document, following a perspective shared by historian Harry Jaffa. However, legal scholar Wanjiru Njoya argues against this interpretation, suggesting it's an overly ambitious reading of the text.

1. Justice Thomas's Explanation of Equality:

• Thomas shared the foundational lesson he learned from his grandparents about formal equality before the law. He believes that despite prevalent discrimination, individuals are equal in God's eyes and that this belief transcends man-made laws.

• He emphasizes that equality is recognized in the natural rights tradition and is inherent to all, not granted by government.

2. Historical Context of the Declaration:

• Thomas claims that the Declaration of Independence is not just a document declaring independence but one that laid principles for future civil rights leaders like Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr. He considers it one of the greatest antislavery documents in Western civilization.

• However, Njoya critiques this view, arguing that the Founders were primarily focused on fighting tyranny and establishing liberty for themselves, not racial equality or civil rights.

3. Classical Liberalism vs. The Declaration:

• Thomas underscores that the law should provide equal treatment to all citizens, insisting on the natural rights of life, liberty, and property, but struggles to align these with the intentions behind the Declaration.

• He argued that the virtues of the Declaration should inspire contemporary Americans to uphold its principles, suggesting that the ideals of equality shouldn't be interpreted retroactively to fit modern understandings.

4. Disparity in Ideals:

• Njoya points out that equating the Founding Fathers with modern civil rights movements misrepresents their original intent. The Founders were not abolitionists, nor were they fighting for ideals like open immigration or national healthcare.

• She emphasizes that the intention behind their fight was firmly tied to their context and goals of the American Revolution.

5. Lincoln and the Declaration's Legacy:

• Abraham Lincoln's interpretation of the Declaration as a promise of equality for all races is mentioned, but Njoya insists that this reading doesn't align with the Founders' views and contextual beliefs at the time.

• She asserts that imposing modern morals on historical figures can be misleading and fails to appreciate the historical significance of their actions within their time.

6. Misinterpretation of Historical Documents:

• Njoya critiques Jaffa's interpretation that sees the Declaration as a commitment to gradual abolition, arguing that it misunderstands the historical context.

• She posits that the Declaration should not be retrofitted to support modern concepts of equality that didn't exist at the time.

Njoya concludes that the true essence of Thomas's speech lies in his foundational belief that rights are inherently given by God, not by governments. He underscores that the legitimacy of government authority is rooted in the consent of the governed, not from any notion of moral superiority over historical figures like the Founding Fathers. She advocates for recognizing the natural rights and dignity of all individuals as taught by Thomas's grandparents, rather than searching for an inherent alignment of the Declaration with contemporary values. 

https://mises.org/mises-wire/justice-clarence-thomas-harry-jaffa-and-declaration-independence