9 Burst results for "James Wilson Institute Dot Org"

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

03:28 min | 9 months ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"Both in the distinctly and precisely natural law and jurisprudence jurisprudential questions but also more More you're more personal interests as well but as for practical recommendations i'd be self starters and always ask for more work when you run out of things to do when you finish your work. They always have more for you to. That's how The institute will get the most workout of you and we'll be able to get get the most from you. Also i think how you get the most out of the internship in terms of finding a deep sense of meetings satisfaction in the work. You're doing you go back to your friends and colleagues at the end of and say and say look i did get to contribute to this This wonderful institute and then also a piece of advice would be to just trust your commonsense intuitions. Professor artists doesn't talk about common sense for no reason so we have an inborn sense that we sort of know what we're doing and if we have if you if you run into trouble economically ask for help but you can make your own judgment and you got calls And it'll probably turn out just fine. Yeah just what the yeah. Yeah gosh sean. I echo quite the asking questions and the all such thing as stupid questions. Don't let people tell you otherwise but don't be afraid to look stupid asking questions and say i don't understand what you just said that we saved another way or you know this. There's some premise. That you keep assuming here that might be really obvious. But can you save me simply Don't be afraid asks questions because those are really really help you out It also push-back because that's when you really see the attenuation was the logic and really be able to play it out. Save asking questions and post pushing back for the sake of understanding the truth of. It's really really key fundamental. Well jets were resented that this is your last week with us. We're hopeful that you'll bring back to both of your campuses These ideas which you've been immersed in over these past twelve weeks But more importantly we oh pat. You don't become strangers and you're and you're able to keep a close tie with us. This was this was a really great summer And so we hope our listeners got a taste of just how spoiled we been to have both of these young men working closely with us so To tom into sean. Thank you so much and to our listeners. We hope you've enjoyed this little peek behind the curtain. To see just how you know. We we do. Our work. At the james wilson institute. So thank you sean. Thank you tom of gas. And the thank you everyone jay and tom. It's been graded booking alongside likewise. Sean thank you. I mean i was going to be working at golf course this summer. So this has been quite the upgrade in terms of meaningful work. And i've learned to so much so i'd say i've been spoiled as well all right. Thank you guys. This program has been brought to you. By the james wilson institute on natural rights in the american founding. If you'd like to learn more about the james wilson institute please visit james wilson institute dot org. Thanks for listening..

sean james wilson institute tom jets pat jay Sean james wilson institute on natu golf
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

02:37 min | 11 months ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"It's kind of the go back on the first generation of post nine hundred eighty two kind of federal society luminaries Then attorney general. Ed meese the in the reagan administration was of course one of them bringing alongside Scalia and bork and in the eighties they asked Train general meese. If he could overturn one case what would it be and his answer was miranda versus arizona. I mean how anachronistic does that answer look from a contemporary perspective right so i could not agree with the thrust of What jesse say more here Look one of the things that i am deeply involved in I would actually probably save. Come the locus of my professional commitments. For which you know the jurisprudential areas just kind of one cog in the broader constellation. The locus of all that i'm trying to do is to try and put the pieces back together. Any more cogent than substance direction after the hurricane that was the trump presidency. That's kind of what orrin cast describes trump has called a hurricane. A hurricane is very good at exposing rotting foundations. But it's not very good not very good at gaza time to build But i i do think that it better originalism very much a place in that building process. I agree entirely very well all right. Well this was. This was a real treat. to To jesse josh. We can't thank you enough for taking some time to chat with us. Today and for the benefit of our listeners will make sure to push out links to all of jesse's and josh's recent work on this important discussion and we look forward to You know we're just emerging now to be able to see all of our friends in public again so we're looking forward to seeing both of them You know soon very soon of course Josh based out of denver on his way to dc and jesse. Hopefully even sooner now that jesse your local and affiliated with clermont's new center on the american way of life so Thank you both and will level chat again soon. Appreciate it. Thanks so much pests. This program has been brought to you. By the james wilson institute on natural rights in the american founding. If you'd like to learn more about the james wilson institute please visit james wilson institute dot org. Thanks for listening..

Ed meese Today trump Josh denver james wilson institute eighties one case Scalia both bork meese one james wilson institute dot org first generation american clermont things josh one of
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

03:13 min | 1 year ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"Someone i mean. I don't know. I'm going to give a bland answer like gives the book a chance. I think at the very least let me put it this way. I think a lot of people who have live harried lies. Seek a kind of digest of of some Of the kind of cornerstone Traditional ideas and this is you know a pretty good way to to get that. It's in a way is also prepare you. Can you know i. I think i as i've done that. I've completed what i set out for myself. Which is that mission of being. Also a a high vulgar riser. A high popularizer. Can you get away with you. Get a pretty good idea. What hans jonas thought about not what this was and what honduras thought about narcissism which is sort of still remains the foundational approach to this religious phenomenon If you want to try it you know. And i think If you if you want to know what injury to work thought again. I give you a pretty Rigorous but cohesive narrative driven account of her life and worldview Seneca the same so and so forth. So that's my real pitches is one of them is for for young. You're young intellectual curious person you know you should if you have clinicians in that department which i did not do not look like go get a phd when one of these areas. Maybe and you'll know far more about them than i do as as a popularizer. But i've given you a good intriguing opening to two very different strands of thought than the ones that That we live under the answer other questions. I guess i just have to speak about my own experience to that there. There are those moments of and i've written a memoir but why convertible your you face questions about hell heaven right and wrong Death and you wanna cry out to god and do it and you know he'll answer well so rob. This was a real treat. And i think you know. We're just extraordinarily grateful for the time you've taken to chat with us and to do such a deep dive into your book and into so many of the ideas that are You know part of the Part of the The public discourse The book is the unbroken thread. Discovering the wisdom of tradition in an age of chaos From convergence all find booksellers nationwide even amazon. I suspect although we'll make sure that our listeners have linked to purchase the book directly from the publisher So rob thank you so much And we wish you all the best In these months as we we hope the book becomes Just more and more widely read. Appreciate my pleasure. Thank you thank you so much to all of you. This program has been brought to you. By the james wilson institute on natural rights in the american founding. If you'd like to learn more about the james wilson institute please visit james wilson institute dot org. Thanks for listening..

amazon hans jonas james wilson institute one rob Seneca wilson american two very different strands james honduras institute
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

01:59 min | 1 year ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"This program is brought to you. By the james wilson institute on natural rights in the american founding. If you'd like to learn more about the james wilson institute please visit james wilson institute dot org. We hope you enjoy the program. Hello and welcome to the james wilson. Podcast i'm your host garrett's networker. Today will be chatting with stephen soukup. Stephen is the author of the book. The dictatorship of whoa capital how political correctness captured big business from encounter books. Stephen is e senior commentator vice president and publisher of the political form an independent research provider that delivers research and consulting services to the institutional investment community with an emphasis on economic social political and geopolitical events. Likely to have an impact on the financial markets in the united states and abroad. He's also the director of the political form institute a nonprofit educational organization dedicated to creating and preserving community primarily among those who earn their living and create wealth for the nation through the capital markets. Soukup is followed politics and federal regulatory policy for the financial community since one thousand nine hundred ninety six when he joined the award winning washington research office of prudential securities. He's also a fellow in culture in the economy at the culture of life foundation. Also joining us on the podcast. Is peter spence. One of our interns at the james wilson institute peter. Why don't you get a started. Why did you write this book. And what specifically led you to dive into the dictatorship of will capital. Well i have worked for twenty. Five years My entire professional career In the financial services world and.

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

01:43 min | 2 years ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"And even I know it sounds silly, but like you type section to thirty into twitter, you might find other voices who are who are giving some really unique insight What one author I really love on this is Charles Cook. He's done at national review. He's done a lot of work that I agree with audit and he's made some hard points that I think are right, so they're so but I think that those would be. Those should be more than enough. Well in the spirit of Leroy, Jenkins Shoshana Weisman and John Schlepping. Thank you so much for joining us today. This was a real treat and I think our friends listener gonNA feel like they more fully understand the stakes of the issue and the underlying concerns that the folks on the right have about reform to thirty we are absolutely on our website will make sure that we linked to as many of those A. B., says that China John discussed that you can read more of their work and definitely be sure to follow both of them on twitter They're both excellent. Presences are now just following this debate and plenty of the other issues of the day, and We were just grateful to call them both friends so. Again John Shannon. Thank you so much. Thanks so much for having us. This program has been brought to you by the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights in the American founding. If you'd like to learn more about the James Wilson Institute please visit James Wilson Institute Dot Org. Thanks for listening..

James Wilson Institute on Natu Charles Cook James Wilson Institute Dot Org twitter James Wilson Institute John Shannon national review Shoshana Weisman John John Schlepping Leroy
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

14:00 min | 2 years ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"A DC district court ruling might be mid nineteen sixties but it really didn't start in earnest until the Obama Administration. So at the time it was it was it was pretty newfound unprecedented phenomenon. And I don't think many people who weren't already kind of deeply thinking about article three theory about what the judicial power with the judge in power means. When does main were necessarily giving a whole lot of thought to this and again recall that post-coup Cooper versus Aaron this judicial supremacists mindset has percolated so thoroughly through the Legal Academy and the legal profession. That becomes something of a universal belief. So if you're an impressionable. Young Conservative law students young lawyer. Etcetera you come you come imbibed this universal logic without thinking about it too too hard. I can understand that But your point your point stance in more generally I would I would. I would always encourage listeners as podcasts as I would always encourage everyone to try to be intellectually consistent as possible Yeah that's great and then yet. Do you have any concerns about conservatives on these court or the lower courts Not Understanding the threat of judicial spacey Where're legislatures and Why did they confuse judicial review? Which is the legitimate power of our judicial branch with the notion of judicial supremacy? So there's not a whole light. The DEJESUS PHARMACY. Debate has to emanate from People and the most natural way that to happen is through. Our elected officials Through Senators Congressman Executive Branch. And then obviously also at the state level Quite unions against the notion that the US court is the on compensating final. An exclusive arbiter of Of all of all that is justice and Ryan. The world is a debate that has to happen necessarily from kind of outside the confines of benign black groped Oracle themselves. Just Thomas for for for. His part has intimated many times that he does not subscribe to this. He gives a footnote. If I believe in the gamble versus United States concurrence from last term that he basically says this is a lie I WANNA say. He intimated again in the sports gambling. A case Murphy of Twenty Eighteen. I think it was Don't quote me on that one but I in any event. It's just not as I said this numerous times And Justice Scalia. I I don't know if you've ever public but I I've I've definitely seen Robbie George and publicly say that he had private conversations with doesn't Scalia or close friends honestly and just as quickly as a numerous times this was a petition lies well but he but the with the revolt tasks to happen. Fundamentally from outside of the judicial system it has to happen with legislators on essentially assured committee on the Senate floor as it happened. Most fundamentally with the President Abraham Lincoln is the republic's greatest statesmen I in general. But certainly on this issue he without question the greatest oracle example of what not just rhetorically but substantively fighting back against an all powerful judiciary looks like right and I thought that trump had a brilliant brilliant a perfect opportunity to do exactly that to so-called Poland Abraham Lincoln last summer on the Census Citizenship Pace. Debate I thought that was a wonderful opportunity to to to truly go all the way to speak and say that we will apply to aces or to to the party for the stupid but we will not recognize it broader principle He didn't do that. I was a little bit point of the time. It's actually one of my hopes for president trump in a perspective second term. I I think a second term trump could steal Potentially unleash enough on a number of issues this being but one of them but I would love to see president trump. Go quote all the way in pull. Full Abraham Lincoln sometime in the second term. I think he's uniquely will sued doing so I I think he He generally does not seem to care about the inevitable blowback. That comes that a lot of people are pulling him kind of a fascist authoritarian. Anyway so I don't think that would grind grind his years very much And He seems to Kinda Harbor in an eight disdain Virginia power to begin with. I mean we can always remember. You know who who can forget his. We'd about the so-called Judge Right So kind of harbor. This intrinsic Disdain for the judicial branch so I think he is very well suited to doing it and I really. I hope he. Does you know these. These discussions that we've had today they. They make me hopeful Josh You know in that are people like like you who are on the front lines and are making these arguments in the public square But what also makes me Pessimistic about though. Is that while these arguments. I think are coherent What is broadly lacking courage And to make these arguments With the halls of Congress and at the highest levels of the If at the highest levels of the executive and with that in mind as a prudential matter baby are only are only hope in the short run is to actually have members of the federal judiciary. Make this argument. Because they still have the the best outlet by which to cut through the fog of any You know pressing other pressing issues and to make this argument in a case or controversy That seems naturally suited as a purely provincial matter. That's that's probably right I I'm enough of a skeptic in pessimists on all things political debate that's probably right You know I mean I'm I'm quintessentially conservative. So nothing if not a step tooker of all things before me and in the realm of politics in particular So yeah I generally look upon our political class as bike in kind of pain with a with a very very very broad brush as being a bunch of Punk feckless cowards. So I yes I. My hopes are not high For someone to take the stand that needs to be taken so you're probably right for a short term posse midterm matter. Our hopes are probably best for this to kind of gain traction within the judiciary itself And by the way a tangible concrete instance of that would be the Supreme Court. Granting served in ruling the correct way on the constitutionality of nationwide injunctions That that that would be that would be probably that would be the most profound anti Primacy advancement that the that the judicial branch could probably ever produce and I actually don't think it's outside the realm of possibility I'm not convinced the votes provided there is now a Clarence Thomas. His trumpy Hawaii concurrence has already indicated. He's narrow. I hard to believe that there are not at least one or two other boats for him. I'm not sure we have five that proposition quite yet It wasn't alone concurrence. Let's forget From Thomas and drummer his Hawaii but that that that would be a hugely successful very tangible thing that the court could do to advance. Its cause so josh. We don't have too much time left but We do want to be able to ask you one more question and I guess it would be a question that people who are most interested in these issues but they they wanna get a firmer from her hold on on where the hottest debates are happening in the conservative movement. Where do you think they would be? Best served Reading closely What are some topics that you think would be most helpful for people who are trying to feel these issues out. Would it be going back to the federalist papers? Do you think there's some really sharp on scholars better that are shedding light on these subjects presently? Oh yeah wow great question So yeah I mean you can't go wrong obviously with starting with the American founding itself and there's no better entryway to doing so than actually reading the federal safer. Then you know the people who don't have an autonomy our hands to everyone I think can just do a quick Google search and figure out what the most important papers are quickly. But you know I mean you start. Start with the obvious ones Tan Thirty nine thirty nine forty five fifty one. Seventy eight sixty five. Which which is the impeachment up in the news a lot recently. There's that that that's a great place to start I think I think Lincoln. Scholarship is also a great place to start Abraham Lincoln. He's my hero ball heroes. I'm probably born on his birthday In my opinion Abraham Lincoln was the one who brought America's founding into Russian and Harry Joshua's of course the great natural law scholar whose was closely affiliated with This proposition of advancing Lincoln as kind of the The one who truly Rod Jefferson's rhetoric in the declaration and made it into America's national DNA so to speak. So I think high jobless scholarship would be another great place to look of course involve like looking at the Lincoln. Douglas debates with with people who talk about I I would encourage also to To look at books Dr John Marshall and Joseph Story to the great nineteenth century jurists. Who I think who I think. Both in their own ways Did immense good in continuing an excellent explicatives And extending was the very rich vibrant centuries lawn English common legislation now we inherited from our angle forebears They're both brilliant. I think profoundly conservative men actually in their own ways That would be a good place to start as far as kind of older. Eighteenth nineteenth century based readings As far as as far as some more modern scholars Michael Paulson. Who I've mentioned already is my single favorite constitutional law scholar on all issues pertaining to the judicial supremacy debate. He's written a number of excellent largely articles on on this kind of easier to digest essays. You'll be a great place to look ray place to look Keith Whittington colleague Robert Georgia's in the Princeton Politics Department is another fabulous writer on all things pertaining to the bishop spicy debate. I think just a very sharp legal anchor More generally and and You know I mean just kind of more. Generally as far as like websites to throw out there I have all liberty website hosts host a lot of really nice full Richard. Reid is a good friend of they. Just consistently churning out quality S Yes absolutely now they. They're they're consistently turning out good work I try to read publications like First Things. Public discourse fairly regularly You know there's there's lots of places on the broader web to look as well on Phil Philip Hamburger. Who I mentioned another one of my very favorite scholars his his his First Amendment Stars. Roosters so rich. It's it's really it's really wonderful but you know. Hopefully that's a teaser. For now all right well. That's all the time we have We had a really great time speaking with you and putting all these questions passed you So thanks so much for that. And we look forward to seeing your article in public discourse. Thank you so much I get on the American mind. Claremont Institute's new online outlet. But but it will be wonderful to have that up there and I I really appreciate you guys having the on. Thank you so much. Thank you Josh. Do this program has been brought to you. By the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights in the American founding. If you'd like to learn more about the James Wilson Institute please visit James Wilson Institute Dot Org. Thanks for listening.

President Abraham Lincoln Josh You Clarence Thomas US Poland Abraham Lincoln Justice Scalia executive Lincoln president Obama Administration Oracle Senate Claremont Institute James Wilson Institute on Natu post-coup Cooper Legal Academy DEJESUS PHARMACY Ryan Supreme Court Google
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

14:22 min | 2 years ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"First of all I kind of disagree with the idea that we should have any control over. What Congress actually does I think I think they will not adopt laws that they themselves would not want to live under so that. I don't think we have to worry about the problem is that Congress doesn't want to adopt laws. They don't want to make very tough decisions. What THEY WANNA do is hand over those decisions to administrative agencies and then when their constituents come to them to complain they say well? I didn't vote for that. A that's the administrative agency. We'll just have to do something to take control of that agency. That's too easy and I'm afraid that's where Congress has come to so my view is that we should leave a lot of this to Congress to decide and some people in Congress may not want to live under some of the laws that are passed undoubtedly they will. They will be a minority in each case and if there isn't a minority then you have to wonder whether this is a real law or not or whether it's just a goal that is being sick because there ought to be people who oppose some of the things that Congress wants to do but when it can come together and make law than it is doing and responding in that in that sense to what the people want then we have a real legislative process going on well in the book. You also talk about the near future so the book was written in early. Twenty night came on early. Two thousand eighteen cracked and here. We are at the the end of Twenty nineteen and the Supreme Court is back in session and we have a number of cases coming up on the docket that have a significant potential to kind of reshape. This landscape that we're talking about the administrative law and so from your perspective. Do you see any key. Cases on the Supreme Court's docket that have a real potential to rain in the the administrative state and do see any cases in particular have a potential to strike at the heart of the president's that you mentioned so far as Chevron deference and it's causing our difference. I don't see any on the docket for the coming year. That doesn't mean that things can't come up during the course of this this term that are got raise these issues. One in the past term was The so-called Gundy case that many of us look to as a way for the court to deal with it unfortunately deal with this whole problem. Gundy case was a very good non delegation case because it gave it appeared to give the attorney general tremendous amount of authority to create a law for people and then prosecute them under which would be exactly the thing that that the should not be able to do. Congress should make the law and the administration the Attorney General of the President or someone should enforce that law. Unfortunately the case was argued before justice. Cavanaugh was confirmed or had taken his oath at least and so the they were only there. Were only a maximum of four justices on the court at that time who seemed to be willing to take on the non delegation question and so. I won't go into the details of it but it was not done turned out that the Gundy case came out in a different way entirely because they could not find a majority to do what the what I think. Many of us hoped they would do now it. I'm told I have not ascertained this for myself but I'm told that gundy now has asked for a rehearing of his case with Now that cavenaugh seated so there would be a full court whether the court will agree to that is questionable. And I'm sure there's a lot of opposition on the part of the Liberal members of the court that they won that case they they succeeded in pushing that aside and they don't want it to come up again now so very high politics I think. Probably being played within the conferences of the justices at this point to see if they can figure a way to get back and look at the gun declared Gundy case again. I don't know whether they will succeed. But if they if they do they will be a lot of bitterness on the part of the Liberal members of the court and that might show in the in the ultimate decision but other cases will come along. I have to. It's not as though I have a lot of time left but I have to be optimistic. That lawyers all over this country. See that and I hope they read my book. They will see that. There is an opportunity to bring a non delegation case before the Supreme Court. And so they will start talking with clients about whether those clients would like to take this case because they think it might go all the way to the Supreme Court because it raises these very important issues. That's how the system works the courts signals that it is ready to take a step. It might not have a full majority to do it but it looks as though there might be an so lawyers who are ambitious and interested in making an important point will bring these cases up through the process until they get to the court in fact I know of one case right now that is not at the court. But we'll probably get to the court and that has to do with the power of the president to impose tariffs. We're living at a time. Now where the president is imposing a lot of terrorist when every wants to impose a tariff. He does it. Where does he get that authority when the constitution says very clearly that Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations? How can the president just do this? Well the president's been getting this kind of authority by Congress a fellow. I know a friend of mine. Very very brilliant lawyer. He's bringing along a case representing the steel aid industry Which is complaining about the president's steel tariffs. He's he's making a completely non delegation argument even though he himself personally is a liberal but he's been retained by his clients to attack this and impose interject the non delegation doctrine. So that case is now at an appellate court within the tariff review area that separate from the general cases and after it goes through the appellate process there he will probably lose because there are cases that are against him that we're not decided on that are non delegation on non delegation basis. He will probably seek review by the Supreme Court that will be another big non delegation case. But I'm quite confident that there will be many more coming along because what I said before about lawyers who get the signal. They realized. There's an opportunity here. They have a client. Who's willing to pay the cost for this or or there's some group that's willing to pay the cost for financing this case and they will bring it along through the process and there will be many such cases if the court can provide signal that it's ready to take on the non delegation issue all the next time one of those cases is taken. The justices would be well served as well as the lawyers who argue those cases. It'd be well-served reading Towards the end of your book you have a Nice Nalysts of some of the predominant arguments on the left and the right In support of the administrative state I a strong defense of the curtain regime from Jillian Metzker of Harvard. And then you have Adrian for Mule of Harvard. Offering a defense of the administrative state from the right. Can you compare and contrast left? Verbiage would probably consider himself more on the right. But Yeah This question on this better than certainly not part of a consensus on the on the legal right but yeah those those arguments are certainly going to be in play. I think our listeners would be very interested in your thoughts. Yeah well I in in reading the the The justifications that had been advanced by the rules and and Metzger 's and so forth. I don't see anything in those Justifications that makes a lot of sense to me because they don't seem They don't seem to understand that the powers that are exercised by the administrative agencies. Come from somewhere. And they're not and and their justification seems to be well. If Congress passed a law that administrative agency can use in some original and and and useful way even though there is some doubt about whether the law was intended to cover this area. That's all that is necessary. They have to have a colourful claim that they have been authorized. Do this. It's kind of like a Chevron justification but the idea of that that the the separation of powers really has no more meaning than that that Congress can authorize an An administrative agency to take actions of of any kind just in general makes a mockery. It seems to me of our separation of powers and I've read their arguments and I still maybe it's deficiency on my part but I don't see that it that they take account of the separation of powers in the constitution in fact there's some statements by remove. That's that seemed to be simply this. And that is if Congress that these agencies could not be doing anything if they weren't authorized by Congress and since they are doing something then they must have authorization from Congress that to me doesn't doesn't take account all of what the separation of powers is intended to do. Let's talk just for a minute because we haven't had a chance to of why we have a separation of powers and and the reason that that The framers adopted a separation of powers is that their view was that if the same group or the same person has both the power to make law and the power to enforce it. That is a great danger to the liberty of the people and the liberty of the people was the guiding principle of the framers. And so when we talk about administrative agencies having essentially the power to make the law and enforce it we're violating the whole reason for the separation of powers in our constitution. And I I read Metzger. I read virtue. I I read many other people and I don't see that they really pay any attention to what the purpose of the separation of powers was I. Think on on that Cheery note we're going to a but for our listeners the book is judicial fortitude the last chance to rein in the administrative state by Peter Wallison. And we're just so pleased to have you with us. Thank you so much pleasure. Thank you very good questions and you obviously done some deep thinking about this issue. Great thanks a lot for your time. We hope to see you. This program has been brought to you by the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights in the American founding. If you'd like to learn more about the James Wilson Institute please visit James Wilson Institute Dot Org. Thanks for listening..

Congress Supreme Court president gundy Metzger Chevron James Wilson Institute on Natu Cavanaugh Peter Wallison James Wilson Institute Jillian Metzker attorney Adrian James Wilson Institute Dot Org Attorney General
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

08:00 min | 3 years ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"Every time I go I can't help but see how more religious societies coming even on our own people who describe themselves as secular Jews. You see very clearly see. They're starting to Reimb- race religious practices that doing doing ceremonies that they don't quite understand but they under they want some sort of connection with they are and where they come from. You see more men wearing hammock. You See Places more places shutting down for sure about all of this is very consist. This is all held together with a society. That is very very more than in many respects. So I think you can see that. That's just example. I could probably quote others. But that's an example of society that was very sensitive mystic Atheism was seen as the position of the intellectual class. Well that's changing and it's changing faster. I think than most people realised so those are examples. I think that gave me Hook that a type of reintegration of reason and faith north beyond the West. It's not beyond us. Decline is always a choice and we don't have to all declined by simply letting reason faith one third or further away from each other. So your arguments meet sympathetic years on this podcast and it's really a pleasure as you kind of take the reader on a tour through centuries of Western literature but the Frank Reality persists that a lot of people in the West especially especially young people. Just haven't been exposed to the ideas that underlie the claims in your book. So if you can assign a required reading list for every person in America what three books would you include under less? Not Including of course reason faith in the struggle for Western civilization deeply unfair. Well there's there's any number of books Let me start For those people who are interested in exploring and understanding the tradition of natural law and who are prepared to take the time to think through these questions to ask questions about the nature of reason and how it relates to questions of human freedom to justice to the nature of society community and even the nature of bride's And it's tough but I'd recommend Jones finished his book. Natural Law and natural rights now slightly buys he was my is. He supervised mydeal of Oxford. But that book I think is very profound in explaining reasons potentialities powers and the loss check is about the case for God. And what's interesting? Is that the book. Says Look you don half to believe in God to accept all these claims about natural reason not to rights and natural law by the same thing you don't have to accept belief in God to adhere to claims of natural but natural order does tend to point you in that direction because it makes you ask questions about where this ultimate reason come from. So that's one text I think that and it's it deals with many of the modern objections. Right that we've talked about to to the nature to having a more than instrumental view of reason and having this Richard Conception of a reason that points in the direction truth the good and the beautiful. That's one thing second which I would suggest. And this is a very different and so some respect it's also hot book I would really recommend reading Adam. Smith's the wealth of nations. Why would I say that? The one and one reason is because it's a type of representations type of the high point Scottish in mind and it's important because it's a work of social signs and so work of social science that tries to understand reality through and empirical lands and that's very important because I think that we've lost saw off in many respects the nature of some science and the way in which the plying it can reveal many important things about the world that we had hitherto not paid attention to or had ignored so Smith's wealth of nations does reveal many things about the workings of Modern Commercial Societies. But people had sent before but had not really put then minds around and had not outlined to the systematic way. But it's a very important work of social sign that I think represents in many respects the it's the culmination if he liked the best of the Scottish enlightenment also represents one of the major moments all of the enlightenment project and this is something I think frankly a lot of religious believers should read and have an appreciation for to understand how these things these things what lost of all This is a much sought text. I'd really suggest reading Benedicta. Sixteenth Reagan's address. It's about three thousand eight hundred words long. It does not take very long to read and I would really recommend reading it first of all by itself. The way takes us through the trajectory of West history. How the West became the West? How how the integration of faith and reason started to break down but they're not recommend highly recommend reading it in conjunction with the common tree that was written by the late in the very great father. James Show it's a whole analysis operations address reasonably addressed and then re father Sol's country on the. It's it's extremely helpful for understanding what's happened to us where we've come from and how we can move back towards the type of integration of faith and reason that that benedict talked about at. Regensburg which I say is central for understanding. What's happened to the West and how we can put things to get on to say that it may be one of the last things work. But he wrote the dolphins and it's on the back cover as the Smith the two thousand lorries and economics very different men from different both Berry Devout Christian approaching things one from the standpoint of the social sciences from the standpoint of the team from also and yet many of their conclusions about the world and the relationship between faith and reason end up in the same place so natural or natural rights is One Book I would seriously just people read Adam. Smith's wealth of nations and the Reagan spoke with mass accompanied by Father Shelves Commentary. The book is reason. Faith and the struggle for Western civilization by Dr Samuel. Greg you can find it at fine booksellers nationwide and on Amazon. Thank you very much Sam for an enlightening conversation and we look forward to chatting with you again in the future sometime. Thanks for having me on. It's been a pleasure to be with you and I greatly commend the work of James Wilson sent to anyone. Who's listening you doing? Great great work. Thank you very much. Thank you. This program has been brought to you by the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights in the American founding. If you'd like to learn more about the James Wilson Institute please visit James Wilson Institute Dot Org. Thanks for listening..

Smith Natural Law James Wilson Institute on Natu Reagan James Wilson Reimb James Wilson Institute James Wilson Institute Dot Org America Regensburg Richard Conception James Oxford Modern Commercial Societies Jones benedict Dr Samuel Sam Amazon Greg
"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

James Wilson Institute Podcast

03:17 min | 3 years ago

"james wilson institute dot org" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast

"And the custom when Marshall Becomes chief justice. Is that during these discussions. The justices may only have wine. If it's raining I assume that this was to cheer themselves. On Marshall's custom was to always ask one of his colleagues often associate justice story. You Know Brothers Story. We look out the window and tell us what the weather is. Story might say well. The Sun is going down and a clear sky marshal would say our jurisdiction is so vast by the law chances. It must be raining somewhere. The wine was served to the Marshall Court. This may explain the number of unanimous decision. I'm serious I'm serious about that. Because because there was this was a man who I mean except versus Jefferson. He really really liked almost everybody. Almost everybody liked him Justice story the first time he heard him as a lawyer. I love his laugh and I realize I've written a number of biographies. This is the first person who's a laugh was described. Wow did out in this whole like It's not that they lacked a sense of humor. But but this is the this is the first person I ever read the description of laugh and stories. I love his laugh. So that shows you you know what kind of a guy? He was one-on-one and that's how he ran his court. I mean he al- also. There was the power of his mind. There was the power of his legal reasoning. But but the first thing the sort of the first story of this personality is this this warmth this geniality this ability to get along with people and You know the expression herding cats. Well you know that that can be what what the Supreme Court is like or any any small group politics and Marshall had that ability. He had that gift and That that geniality that good fellowship was was a key part of it. Well Richard. You have an open invitation to join us at John Marshall. One time home in Washington. Dc The decor Bacon House. I've eighteenth and F- okay so you can enjoy some wine as Marshall perhaps enjoyed it With us in some other martial files okay. Great they'll take you up on that great. The book is John Marshall. The man who made the Supreme Court Richard Brooker joined us for a a wonderful interview. We encourage you to buy it All bookstores nationwide or on Amazon On the Internet Richard. Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you Garrett. Thanks for having me all right. This program has been brought to you by the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights in the American founding. If you'd like to learn more about the James Wilson Institute please visit James Wilson Institute Dot Org. Thanks for listening..

John Marshall Marshall Court James Wilson Institute on Natu Supreme Court Richard Brooker F James Wilson Institute Dot Org James Wilson Institute Garrett Bacon House Jefferson Washington Amazon