From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Bicentennial of U.S. Const

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Sep 17, 1987
293 Ark. App'x 618 (Ark. 1987)

Opinion

Delivered September 17, 1987


The matter under consideration is the Bicentennial of the Constitution of the United States of America. By this instrument, we reaffirm our support of that Constitution which was signed on this day 200 years ago.

This is a nation governed by the will of its people, who have dedicated themselves to that ideal, and have preserved that ideal through law. Our commitment to the process and principles of government which are enshrined in our Constitution remains firm.

This great country has survived not merely by reliance on the letter of the law, but by attention to the spirit of the law. Our society is one where the aspirations of individuals must be balanced against the dictates of an orderly society. Our Constitution has allowed us to maintain this balance while sustaining a prospering society rounded on principles of justice.

The flexibility of our federal constitution has allowed us to seek, and reach, great achievements. It has also allowed us to be made aware of our failures and, to remedy those failures. Our Constitution effectuates our commitment to equal justice, and recognizes the dignity of humanity.

By this order we acknowledge the legacy that has passed to us through the sacrifices of our forefathers. That same legacy vests in us a continuing duty to insure the continuity of our constitutional form of government and the ideals that are its

Response of John P. Gill Before the Supreme Court of Arkansas

Your Honors, I undertake to speak on behalf of the lawyers of Arkansas in joining this celebration of freedom under law which "we the people" cherish. This anniversary is a phenomenal achievement which no other nation has equalled in the history of man.

But this is not a day to look backward; we lawyers and judges look to precedent — but never dwell on it, because precedent only permits us to analyze the future. So it is with this celebration. We will not dwell on what the framers did or why, but what we can do and why. Certainly those of us who love the law must keep foremost in our minds that we are not observers of the scene. Like John Marshall and Clarence Darrow, we are now players. It is our turn. The Constitution's precedents teach us that each individual lawyer and judge weaves the fabric of freedom.

Let me share with you just one illustration. Our forefathers' unique idea of constitutional government has been imitated several times in the past two hundred years. Today many richly worded constitutions proclaim individual freedom in no uncertain terms. Look at the constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialistic

Republics — the Russian constitution where we find the statement that all power in the Soviet Union belongs to the people. But we know that is not so, it is just rhetoric on a piece of paper.

So on this special day we must ask the question: "Why is their constitution just a piece of paper and ours a written guaranty of freedom?" One unequivocal answer is that the American judiciary has continuously struck the balance of the rule of law and has insured that the Constitution speaks to men and women of each age.

While other nations look to single minded ideologies, or ethnic oneness, or kings, or armies for their national identity, American judges and lawyers have been primarily responsible for molding the American character so that the rule of law is our national identity.

But I look into your faces and into the faces of other lawyers in this room and you look into mine, and we ask "Are we equal to the task? Can we decide the Constitutional right to die? Can we cope with electronic eavesdropping? Can we stop the arms race?" The rule of law says "yes" to each of these questions; you and I can do these things and more. But the price of liberty is vigilance, and lawyers and judges alike must be good stewards of our legal heritage. As we begin the third century of constitutional government, we, no less than Ben Franklin or James Madison must conduct vigorous self examination, and discard outmoded concepts, and demonstrate modern enlightenment for our contemporaries.

For example what good is a constitutional right to trial by jury, if we cling, solely in the name of a "day in court," to a reluctance to encourage summary judgment of frivolous lawsuits or frivolous defenses which clog the dockets and delay all trials.

As we usher in this new century in our age of enlightenment, let us discharge our duty to form an even more perfect union and let us always be guided by the precedent, that the American Constitution was drafted in large part to outline the relationship of the majority to the minority or, said another way, to limit the power of government over the individual. As government grows, as our population grows and our affairs become more complex, there are always those who seek to limit the individual and his freedom. When that happens the Great American Experiment — the Constitution — comes into play, reminding us once again, that it guarantees the freedom of "we the people."

Thank you for allowing me to share in this opportunity to tell our grandchildren that we helped introduce the Constitution to its third century.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Bicentennial of U.S. Const

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Sep 17, 1987
293 Ark. App'x 618 (Ark. 1987)
Case details for

In the Matter of Bicentennial of U.S. Const

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF THE BICENTENNIAL OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Sep 17, 1987

Citations

293 Ark. App'x 618 (Ark. 1987)