Forbes ranks Vanderbilt University the 14th best college in America.

 In a Forbes ranking of the top 50 colleges in American in 2022, Vanderbilt University was ranked 14th. Vandy was the only Tennessee college to make the list.

Top Stories

Vandy pays $1.2M to rename Confederate Hall

The Daughters of the Confederacy is going to get a windfall of $1.2 million from Vanderbilt University as payment for allowing Vandy to change the name of Confederate Hall. The Daughters of the Confederacy contributed the sum of $50,0000 in 1933 to build the building and there was a stipulation that it be named "Confederate Hall" and that name is in a stone mantel over the door. The $1.2M sum is today's equivalent of the $50,000 the  Daughters of the Confederacy paid back in1933.

$1.2 million will allow the Daughters of the Confederacy to do a lot to keep alive the memory and to honor the southern civil war dead.  Instead of paying off the Daughters of the Confederacy in order to scrub history, Vanderbilt could have used the $1.2million to provide scholarships to disadvantaged African-American students. $1.2 million is a lot of money to pay so students will not be traumatized by seeing the word "confederate."

The next time alumni get a solicitation from Vanderbilt to contribute to their alma marta, maybe they should ask themselves if Vanderbilt University is a good steward of their charitable giving.

Top Stories

Rep. Black Blasts Vanderbilt University Insurance Policy on Transgender-Related Surgeries

“For all the advanced degrees that exist among Vanderbilt University’s senior administration, there is a painfully obvious lack of commonsense.”

Diane Black

Jun 8, 2016,  Washington, D.C. – Today Congressman Diane Black (R-TN-06) responded to Vanderbilt University’s decision to add hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery to its student insurance policy. Black released the following statement:

“Let’s be honest, this decision is not about the health and wellbeing of Vanderbilt University students, it is about the political agenda of liberal university administrators,” said Congressman Diane Black. 


“Our institutions of higher learning exist to graduate students who are career ready and are prepared to compete in the global economy, not to play politics by providing insurance coverage of medically unnecessary procedures while raking in federal grants. With this stunt, Vanderbilt University has shown itself to be completely out of touch with the values of most Tennesseans, and has surely alienated more than a few students, parents, and donors. I’m especially concerned that, by the university’s own admission, this decision was ‘not deeply debated in any way’ – showing just how little thought went in to such a far-reaching policy.

For all the advanced degrees that exist among Vanderbilt University’s senior administration, there is a painfully obvious lack of commonsense.”

Top Stories

Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal reports on Carol Swain controversy

Reposted from Daily Signal:

Vanderbilt Professor Facing Protests Tells Students to ‘Grow Up’

by  Kelsey Harkness - A black conservative professor who found herself the latest target of student protests nationwide has one thing to say to those calling for her to be suspended from the university where she teachers: “Grow up.”

Among other allegations, students accused Carol Swain, a professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt University for nearly 27 years, of “unprofessional intimidation on social media” and “discriminatory practices in the classroom.”

Swain actively posts her Christian conservative view points on her public Facebook page and website called BeThePeopleTV. She has authored numerous award-winning books and has been cited by the Supreme Court, according to her résumé.

But recently, her conservative values left her at odds with students on campus who started a petition demanding she be removed from the university.

Swain told The Daily Signal in a phone interview on Friday the petition, posted on Change.org, originally demanded that she be fired but has since been amended to read in part:

We are petitioning that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending an investigation into student allegations of unprofessional intimidation on social media, discriminatory practices in the classroom, and unclear representation as a Public Figure with invocations of the Vanderbilt name on her Facebook page.
…
Over the past few years, Professor Carol Swain has become synonymous with bigotry, intolerance, and unprofessionalism. While Swain first and foremost has a right to her personal beliefs and the right to freedom of speech within and outside of the classroom, it recently came to the attention of the Vanderbilt community that Carol Swain has let her hate-filled prejudices negatively impact her work, our student body, and Vanderbilt’s reputation.

Swain said the students behind the protests never took any of her classes, all of which are elective.

“My classes are elective, so no one has to take any of my classes, and no one has to go to my blog page or go to my Facebook,” she said. “I feel that I have been defamed by the students and the petition has been filled with lies, and they ought to be held accountable for what they’ve done.”
Those students, she said, “don’t get to decide whose speech is more valuable than someone else’s.”
Since its release, the petition garnered more than 1,500 signatures. A petition in support of Swain has gained more than 1,000 signatures.

In response to the protests, Nicholas S. Zeppos, the chancellor of Vanderbilt University, released a statement that in part read:

Professor Swain’s opinions are her own. They do not reflect the opinions of the university in any way. They are not my opinions, the opinions of the provost, or the opinions of university leadership.
…
Vanderbilt University is committed to diversity, inclusion, and freedom from discrimination.  Ensuring that our campus is a safe, welcoming, and supportive environment for every member of the Vanderbilt community has been, and will always be, our top priority.

Zeppos did not address whether or not the university planned to investigate allegations of discrimination made against Swain. According to the petition, those allegations include:

• Firstly, Professor Carol Swain has failed to clearly separate her role on her Facebook page as a “Public Figure” from the Vanderbilt name, creating a situation in which the public may misconstrue her as speaking on behalf of the University. We want to make it clear that Carol Swain in no way represents our alma mater, regardless of the fact that she teaches here.
• Secondly, there have been several instances in which students have contacted Professor Swain to hold an intellectual debate with her, and in return, she has resorted to name-calling and posting their personal contact information on her public page. In many cases, students claimed this led to public shaming, intimidation, and/or harassment by her followers.
• Additionally, several students who claim to have taken Professor Swain’s class(es) have expressed concerns that minority students enrolled in her class(es) – especially those who are LGBTQIA+ and/or non-Christians – expose themselves to unfair assessment in-class and may receive lower grades than their peers simply because of their identities. At a University that prides itself on fairness, diversity and inclusion, these allegations are entirely unacceptable if true.

Swain, who is currently on sabbatical, called those allegations “lies” and said she “earned the right” to call herself a professor on Facebook.

“They don’t own the word professor,” she said. “Professor is a word, and I’ve earned the right to call myself a professor.”

Swain did admit to paraphrasing a “threat” she received from a student via Facebook and said she shared a link to that student’s public Facebook on her own page. Swain has since deleted that post.

“Maybe I shouldn’t have done that, but the student contacted me,” Swain said. “My point in showing it was to show the level of disrespect and what I have to put up with at Vanderbilt University with this person saying I was a disgrace.”

“It’s something that has changed in the student body, that they think they can control what people do, not just inside the classroom, but outside the classroom,” Swain said.

While she’s strong in her views, Swain said the situation has taken a personal toll.

“It hurts more to be attacked because the students have been my life. That’s, to me, the sole reason why it’s been so distressing on a personal level.”

But if it causes people to look at the “attacks” on freedom of speech and freedom of religion, Swain says she’s “not sorry about it.”

“I’m very concerned about what’s happening across the nation, and I believe university administrators have lost control and that they’re making a serious mistake when they give into students using those 1960s, 1970s protest strategies,” she said.

After the University of Missouri president was forced to resign earlier this week over his handling of cases involving discrimination, protests have spread nationwide. Vanderbilt University is among a group of colleges and universities facing student protests over alleged incidents of racism and other types of discrimination.

Top Stories

Protect the Academic Freedom of Professor Carol Swain

Carol Swain

by James Lopez, reposted from Citizen Go - Professor Carol Swain has First Amendment rights like every other university student and professor. We support Professor Carol Swain's freedom of speech and expression rights and WE stand with her. What WE want is for university administators to not silence the voices of professors simply because the professors dare not subscribe to political correctness. We live in a pluralistic, and democratic society -- this means that as a free society, we need to welcome and entertain even unpopular ideas in the public discourse, rather than going bonkers whenever someone expresses them.

There is an online student petition demanding the suspension of Professor of Law and Political Science Carol Swain for being “hateful” toward minorities, "unprofessional intimidation on social media", and performing "discriminatory practices in the classroom." This petition has gathered over 1,500  signatures already. These hypersensitive liberals forget that Professor Swain has testified a number of times before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Nicholas S. Zeppos, the Chancellor of Vanderbilt University wrote on Nov. 11th, "Vanderbilt also has a deep and longstanding commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom, which are the foundations of our university’s scholarly activities. Such freedoms necessarily allow for the expression of unpopular and offensive views."

Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt wrote in The Atlantic an article titled, “The Coddling of the American Mind.” In this article, Lukianoff and Haidt define vindictive protectiveness as the creation of a “Culture in which everyone must think twice before speaking up, lest they face charges of insensitivity, aggression, or worse.” In this new university climate, students not only refuse to engage uncomfortable ideas, and refuse that others get a platform to express them, but go further and demand that disciplinary actions follow suit to those who violate the safe space that a university is supposed to be as seen in what has been happening at Yale University and the University of Missouri.

Who would have ever thought that a university owed students a “safe place,” a place where students are shielded and coddled from positions, expressions, ideas, and/or actions that challenge them, present different perspectives, or from others who exercise their First Amendment rights? This new climate in the university replaces the importance of talking about issues with feelings. Emotional reasoning monopolizes the university’s debates and discussions. Lukianoff and Haidt define emotional reasoning in their article as “Assuming that your negative emotions necessarily reflect the way things really are: ‘I feel it, therefore it must be true.’” Emotional well-being is rapidly trumping the exercise of the First Amendment. We must stand up for the voices like the one of Professor Carol Swain. We cannot let hypersensitive students succeed in trumping her First Amendment rights. #StandWithSwain




To sign the petition showing your support of Professor Swain, click here. This will link you to the petition webpage.

Top Stories

Colleges (Including Vanderbilt) Are Reaping What They’ve Sown

by David Fowler, Reposted from FACT - What transpired at the University of Missouri earlier this week and what is now taking place at Vanderbilt University is a classic case of reaping what one has sown. Higher education has descended to a depth from which it cannot escape, because it has destroyed the very intellectual tools by which it could do so.

The first situation to which I referred is the utter breakdown in communication between competing factions at the University of Missouri—minority students and a university leadership those students deemed insufficiently responsive to their concerns. The breakdown led to those minority students dictating to those ostensibly in positions of authority over the administration of the university what employment decisions needed to be made.

The second situation is a Change.org petition circulating at Vanderbilt by which students are calling for the ouster of Dr. Carol Swain because she has espoused viewpoints that the students don’t like, that they deem intolerant, bigoted, and unwelcoming.

The response of Vanderbilt’s Chancellor Zeppos is reflective of the problem:

“Speech whose sole purpose or effect is to discriminate, stigmatize, retaliate, offend, foment hatred or violence, or cause harm has no place in this university.”

Nobody likes speech “whose sole purpose is to foment hatred, violence or harm,” but what is this “effect” test to which Zeppos refers? It is a test of “truth” that lets the hearer decide the outcome. In this case, it will prove to be students who have been steeped in relativism and subjectivism and the belief that feelings are the ultimate arbiter of “truth.”

Relativism, by definition, must question anything that purports to be authoritative, and, of course, nothing can be authoritative if there is no source of authority. Consequently, today’s public universities and “elite” private colleges must therefore implicitly, if not explicitly, call into question all sources of authority.

Thus, university leaders like those at Missouri and Zeppos at Vanderbilt can scarcely assert any legitimate authority over the administration of their universities, for they unwittingly disavow the very notion of authority—or at least when they do assert their authority over a situation, the authority they assert must be grounded only in power and will, not in any reasoned, rational, or philosophical or theological grounds.

But if power is the basis for authority, then who is to say that the students at Missouri were wrong to exert their own power, their own force, their own will? Who is to say that the Vanderbilt students should not start petitions and demand the ouster of Dr. Swain or any professor (or administrator) whose views offend them? When will the Vanderbilt students “wise up” and find a way to attack the true authoritative god at Vanderbilt?

And who might that god be? It’s money. Money has become the one true source of authority on university campuses—their god—which is why the students at the University of Missouri were ultimately effective. They were poised to affect the university’s financial bottom line, which meant that those “ostensibly” in authority, the president and system president, had to go. Having seen that power can win, those who think they are in power, university administrators, will eventually begin to lose their power.

College campuses are in intellectual and moral chaos, and they don’t even realize it. If they do, they don’t seem to know why. They are so awash in moral relativism and its implications that they can’t think straight anymore; they think in circles. Having taught tolerance as the one “true” value, they have raised a generation of the intolerant who turn upon their teachers and leaders.

There is no end in sight for this madness unless our universities recover that which the word “university” implies—the existence of universal truths. The one tool they need to dig out of their mess is the one tool they have destroyed.

---

David Fowler served in the Tennessee state Senate for 12 years before joining FACT as President in 2006.

Top Stories

Liberals out to get Carol Swain fired from Vandy

Carol Swain

The liberal movement to suppress speech and silence conservatives on college campuses has hit Vanderbilt University with a campaign by students to get Professor of Law and Political Science Carol Swain fired from her job.  Even one conservative is one too many for liberals who favor all kinds of  diversity except diversity of thought.

 I am posting the full petition below.  The charges are lame and weak. The best they can come of with to support the charge that she engages in name-calling is that on her Facebook page she said, "Only an idiot would think a 61-year-old black woman who has spent much of her life in academia would benefit from sensitivity training." That is it? Come on; they have no case.

They want to force her to attend diversity training and those signing the petition can say that with a straight face, they don't even see the irony.  Never mind that Dr. Swain is African-American and it is the petitioners who are petitioning against diversity of opinion; the little politically correct liberal Brown Shirts don't want their sensibilities offended by being exposed to ideas to which they do not already subscribe. The same attitude of group-think that once dominated China during the cultural revolution is alive and well on American college campuses.

The underlining in the below petition is mine. Look at what they claim: she has a Facebook page that identifies herself as a professor at Vanderbilt University, she is unkind to students who disagree with her and calls them names, and she is unfair in her grading of  queer students and non-Christians. Swan denies the allegations. Follow the links and you will see their own case is very weak.

Suspend Professor Carol Swain

We are petitioning that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending an investigation into student allegations of unprofessional intimidation on social media, discriminatory practices in the classroom, and unclear representation as a Public Figure with invocations of the Vanderbilt name on her Facebook page.
Over the past few years, Professor Carol Swain has become synonymous with bigotry, intolerance, and unprofessionalism. While Swain first and foremost has a right to her personal beliefs and the right to freedom of speech within and outside of the classroom, it recently came to the attention of the Vanderbilt community that Carol Swain has let her hate-filled prejudices negatively impact her work, our student body, and Vanderbilt’s reputation. Since the initial release of this petition, we have gathered significant feedback from the community, and have decided to limit our grievances to the following three issues.

• Firstly, Professor Carol Swain has failed to clearly separate her role on her Facebook page as a “Public Figure” from the Vanderbilt name, creating a situation in which the public may misconstrue her as speaking on behalf of the University. We want to make it clear that Carol Swain in no way represents our alma mater, regardless of the fact that she teaches here.
• Secondly, there have been several instances in which students have contacted Professor Swain to hold an intellectual debate with her, and in return, she has resorted to name-calling and posting their personal contact information on her public page. In many cases, students claimed this led to public shaming, intimidation, and/or harassment by her followers.
• Additionally, several students who claim to have taken Professor Swain’s class(es) have expressed concerns that minority students enrolled in her class(es) – especially those who are LGBTQIA+ and/or non-Christians – expose themselves to unfair assessment in-class and may receive lower grades than their peers simply because of their identities. At a University that prides itself on fairness, diversity and inclusion, these allegations are entirely unacceptable if true.

In light of these grievances, we are petitioning the Vanderbilt Administration that Carol Swain be temporarily suspended from her tenured position as professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University pending the following resolutions:

• That Vanderbilt administrators will confer with the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) to create and mandate a diversity training program for all Vanderbilt faculty – including Professor Carol Swain – to increase their cultural awareness, foster inclusion of various identity groups, prevent discrimination in the classroom, and to protect the University against inadvertent civil rights violations


• That Vanderbilt conduct an investigation of student allegations that Prof. Swain has shared individual students’ personal information or private profiles on her public media page(s) in attempts to potentially shame, defame, and/or intimidate them – and to report their findings to the student body in a public statement after proper resolution.


• And that Vanderbilt will conduct a review of Professor Carol Swain’s public Facebook page to confirm that she is not violating Vanderbilt's Acceptable Use Policy by misrepresenting herself as a Public Figure of (and/or speaker for) Vanderbilt University, but instead, is representing herself clearly as a Public Figure in a space unaffiliated with the University. This is to ensure that the public does not misconstrue Professor Swain’s statements outside the classroom as being endorsed by the University.

Until these resolutions have been satisfied, we do not feel that Carol Swain’s allowance to teach here is consistent with Vanderbilt’s nondiscrimination policies or the Community Creed, and we will continue to push for administrative action. We appreciate Vanderbilt’s initial acknowledgement of our petition, but we are certainly hoping that their response will ultimately amount to more than what we have seen in the past. Historically, the Vanderbilt community has been entirely unserved by the administration's inability to educate, counsel, and/or suspend Professor Swain.  However, we remain hopeful that things will change. We are calling on the administration to please hear our voices and take action before Carol Swain causes more harm to herself, our community, and Vanderbilt's reputation.
For those who are unfamiliar with Carol Swain, the articles linked below are a brief sample of her work. (As a reminder though, the focus of this petition is on the allegations made against Prof. Swain.  It is not an attack on her beliefs or freedom of speech/press)
Carol Swain’s Op-Ed in The Tennessean: Charlie Hebdo Attacks Prove Critics Were Right About Islam
“Islam is a dangerous set of beliefs totally incompatible with Western beliefs concerning freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of association.”
Be The People TV: C.S. Lewis on Biblical Marriage and Swain Reflections on Gay Marriage
“If we must live side-by-side with gay couples in a culture with a strong crusading homosexual agenda, our only hope is to strengthen ourselves spiritually and intellectually for the battle that awaits us”

I am unsure how of those in the community can come to the aid of Dr. Swain. Perhaps it would be helpful if Vandy alumni let the Vanderbilt administration know they support Dr. Swain. I have already "liked" Dr. Swain on Facebook. If you have not done so, give her a Facebook "like" and let her know you are pulling for her and admire her courage.

Top Stories

Ron Ramsey says Vanderbilt is "notoriously wrong in their polling"

From Post Politics - Upon hearing hearing that two out of three Tennesseans favor the governor’s Insure Tennessee plan in a recent survey, Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey turned to his spokesman and asked a question.

“Did you pull that out of the trash can yet?” he said, followed by a laugh.

Ramsey, arguably the most powerful Republican in state government, said he gives little credence to poll results released Wednesday by Vanderbilt University showing that people favor the governor’s embattled plan nearly by nearly a 2-to-1 margin, want an expansion of health care coverage and want the full legislature to vote on it. Vanderbilt is "notoriously wrong in their polling," Ramsey told reporters. (link)

Top Stories

Vanderbilt Poll on Insure Tennessee Seriously Flawed

Beacon Center Press Release - In what can only be considered an affront to legitimate pollsters everywhere, Vanderbilt University released its latest poll showing that 64% of Tennesseans support Insure Tennessee, Gov. Haslam’s proposal to extend Medicaid benefits to upwards of 450,000 people. The poll is seriously flawed for a number of reasons, including the fact that Vanderbilt refused to release the topline results publicly, contrary to the practices of reputable polling outlets across the country. 

A look at the National Council of Public Polls shows that the Vanderbilt poll doesn’t even meet some of its level one disclosure principles, including complete wording and ordering of questions mentioned in the release. Only due to reporting by the Tennessean can the public even know what question was asked relative to support for Medicaid expansion.

Beacon Communications Director Mark Cunningham noted, "This is one of the most poorly worded questions I have ever seen in my years of analyzing polls. It is no surprise that they got the result they did." The actual question posed was: "Do you strongly support, somewhat support, neither support nor oppose, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose expanding health care coverage for low-income people in the state?"

"Everyone at the Beacon Center would have answered 'support' to that question," Cunningham said, pointing to a quote from Beacon CEO Justin Owen echoing this sentiment when Insure Tennessee was defeated. Cunningham concluded that, "It seems that Vanderbilt is more interested in shaping public opinion than gauging it." 

My Comment: This is unbelievable that Vanderbilt University would ask such a question and then reach the conclusion that 64% of Tennesseans support Insure Tennessee. A majority of Tennesseans may support the Insure Tennessee plan of Medicaid expansion, but that is not what was asked. 

How about this: "Do you strongly support, somewhat support, neither support nor oppose, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose low-income people in the state having adequate food to eat?" After you compile the poll results then you could say, "Tennesseans support expanding Food Stamps in Tennessee." 

Or, how about this: Do you strongly support, somewhat support, neither support nor oppose, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose low-income people in the state having adequate shelter?" Then you could conclude the the poll result show, "Tennesseans support expanding public housing in Tennessee." 

Vanderbilt University should be ashamed. Based on who you ask, how you ask, and what you infer from the results, one can get a poll to produce almost any answer one wants. Advocacy groups do this all the time. I expected a little bit more from Vanderbilt.

Top Stories

Father Breen praises Vandy for hiring lesbian "womonist" to head theology department.

In case you missed it:

A couple days ago Father Joseph Breen, the long-time pastor of St. Edwards Catholic Church, wrote an article in the Tennessean praising Vanderbilt University  for hiring lesbian "womonist" theologian  Emilie M. Townes. Father Breen said, "We are fortunate to have an individual bearing all these “labels,” a female, African-American, homosexual, join our Nashville community in a prestigious position with Vanderbilt University."  He went on to say, "We are fortunate to live in a city with Vanderbilt University, an institution willing to lead society in the right direction."  I guess according to Father Breen, leading society in the  "right direction" is hiring an openly  practicing homosexual to lead the theology department.

I guess I should not be surprised that Vanderbilt hired someone like Emily Townes to head the theology department. Last year Vandy ruled that campus Christian organizations could not require their members or leaders to agree with the groups’ core religious beliefs.  The University abandoned its long tradition of religious tolerance, forcing the groups into adopting moral viewpoints contrary to thousands of years of Judeo-Christian teaching. This new policy of religious intolerance is being justified in the name of "diversity."  Like many liberals and liberal institutions and governments, "diversity" is the new religion. Vanderbilt should quit issuing Doctorates of Divinity and instead just issue Doctorates of Diversity.

Lesbian homosexual activist Emilie M. Townes, a distinguished Yale University scholar whose areas of expertise include Christian ethics and "womanist theology,"  was named dean of Vanderbilt University Divinity School, effective July 1, 2013. Womanist theology "is a religious conceptual framework which reconsiders and revises the traditions, practices, scriptures, and biblical interpretation with a special lens to empower and liberate African American women in America."  (link) As far as I can determine Womanist theology is blend of   Feminist theology , Black theology, and liberation theology.  

Townes is the author of Womanist Ethics and the Cultural Production of Evil and she pastored United Faith Affinitas, a Black LGBT  (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgendered) congregation in Chicago. She is also a blogger at The Huffington Post. She recently wed her same sex partner in Connecticut.





Father Breen has often taken positions contrary to Church teachings on such issues  as those against divorce, contraception, women's ordination, and the married priesthood. He has been disciplined by the Church several times. Over the years he has supported many liberal causes, most recently leading a pro gun control moment in Nashville.

Top Stories

Danial Horwitz's responds to Tracy Tarum's critique of his defense of federal supremacy

The below is a response to an article written by Tracy Tatum critiquing a previous post of Daniel Horwitz's in which he supporting my position critical of a bill sponsored by Representative Joe Carr which would require local Tennessee law enforcement officers to arrest Federal agents enforcing new federal gun control laws in Tennessee. At this link you will find the most recent article in this series which links to the previous post on the topic. Rod

Danial Horwitz's responds to Tracy Tarum's critique of his defense of federal supremacy

by Daniel Horwitz

Dear Mr. Tarum,

I fear that you have misread much of my post, or at least failed to understand it.  My defense of Mr. Williams was not borne out of my own “thoughts” or “conclusions” about the Supremacy Clause.  Nor was it based on my own personal opinion about the proper role of the Federal government.  The primary points I made were objective statements of the law as I understand it, and they can be summarized as follows:

(1) Pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States, whenever a state law conflicts with a Federal law, the Federal law takes precedence;

(2) The power to strike down Federal laws as unconstitutional is vested exclusively within the Federal judiciary; and

(3) Obstructing Federal agents in their official capacity is in fact a crime punishable by 8-20 years in prison (see 18  USC § 111). 

Attacking the claims above on the basis that I am merely a law student is completely reasonable, and doesn’t bother me a bit.  Dismissing the identical views of people like Professor Fisher, Chief Justice Taney and Father of the Constitution James Madison (along with, quite frankly, every legal practitioner alive today) is obviously much less reasonable, but ultimately that doesn't matter, either.  Your response to my post betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of judicial review (point #2, above), and this is ultimately what makes your aggressive critique of me appear so silly. 

As you note, what you find “most disturbing” about my defense of Mr. Williams is that I “assume that the Federal government has power over the sovereignty of the States on domestic matters not enumerated.”  Of course, a thorough reading of my post reveals that I never actually suggested anything of the sort.  What I did say – and what I will repeat here now – is that “the power to declare Federal laws unconstitutional is vested exclusively within Federal courts.”  Similarly, I explained that “there is one and only one mechanism for invalidating a Federal law: appeal to the Federal judiciary for relief, and convince a Federal judge to strike the law down as unconstitutional.”  These are accurate statements of the law.  Thus, even assuming that citizens do have a constitutional right to own “high-capacity” magazines, and even assuming that the Obama Administration's recent initiatives are indeed unconstitutional (and just to be clear, we  probably don’t, and they probably aren’t), your position that Representative Carr’s bill can pass constitutional muster would still be wrong.  Only Federal judges have the power to nullify Federal law. 

Whatever you and Representative Carr may think or want, the state of Tennessee may not usurp the authority of the Federal judiciary, nor take steps to nullify Federal law in the judiciary’s place.  Your belief that our state may lawfully claim such authority has effectively turned the concept of judicial review – a bedrock of our constitutional system – on its head, and it is completely and utterly wrong.  Unlike the Federal judiciary, the state of Tennessee simply cannot nullify a Federal law.  Period.  You are certainly welcome to disrespect titles like “Chief Justice,” and to condemn the Supreme Court’s rulings as  “intentional misinterpretation[s] for personal or political agendas.”  But the Justices of the Supreme Court have spoken with one voice on this issue since our nation’s founding, and one thing that you cannot do is overrule them. 

Taking as an example your hypothetical about a Federal law restricting couples to a maximum of two children, here is how such a situation would likely play out in reality.  The moment that any such law was enacted, it would immediately be challenged in Federal District Court.  An injunction prohibiting enforcement of the law would be granted immediately (indeed, it would be granted long before the bill was scheduled to go into effect), and the law would be struck down shortly thereafter for violating the Fourteenth Amendment rights of citizens pursuant to Skinner v. State of Okl. ex rel. Williamson (which held that procreation is protected as “one of the basic civil rights of man”).  Simultaneously, I suppose it’s possible that an enterprising state legislator would introduce a bill calling for the arrest of Federal agents in order to gin up support from his base in anticipation of a primary challenge to a Congressman beleaguered by a recent abortion scandal.  Such a bill, however, like Representative Carr’s bill today, would violate the Supremacy Clause, and would be an unconstitutional attempt to usurp the power of the Federal judiciary— the fact that it was premised upon the perceived unconstitutionality of a Federal bill notwithstanding.  Once again, just to make the point crystal clear: the fact that a Federal bill itself is unconstitutional is not what matters.  What matters is that the Federal judiciary is the one and only body vested with the power to make that determination.  

On a final note, with regard to the many personal attacks that you’ve celebrated as having been dripping with “condescension, arrogance [and] sarcasm”: I don’t know the origin of your intense hatred for Vanderbilt (which makes you come across a bit crazy, by the way), but allow me a moment to respond to a few of the things that you appear to hate most about both my school and about me personally.  First, at least based on my own experience, Vandy isn’t anything like the ivory-tower law school that you envision.  I don’t perceive it that way, and I honestly don’t think that anyone else does, either.  Second, Vanderbilt Law is not in the liberal “indoctrination” business; I was taught constitutional law by one of the most respected and effective conservative legal scholars of the last century, and unsurprisingly I don’t hold even a single one of the views that you have erroneously attributed to me.  (There isn’t a Liberal alive who holds those views either, by the way.  You’re attacking straw men.)  In particular, I found your accusation that I “believe that subjection to government is the duty of mankind” to be especially entertaining.  Suffice it to say that such nonsense detracts enormously from your credibility, and makes you seem slightly unhinged.

Lastly, being so rudely dismissive of someone whom you’ve never met solely on the basis of your own unsubstantiated belief that they don't have “skin in the game” and have never “actually achieved something” is fairly childish.  In addition to paying taxes here in Tennessee that I'd much rather see spent on something more worthwhile than litigating over a bill that all thinking people realize is unconstitutional (which is really all the justification I need), I actually take great pride in advocating for the limited-government causes that are near and dear to my heart.  When asked, I also do my very best to provide an objective analysis of constitutional law for this blog so that its readers can understand the issues of the day from a purely constitutional (rather than political) perspective.  If you find that offensive, sir, I make no apologies. 

In sum, rather than resorting to petty insults in an effort to support the views you hold, next time it would probably be beneficial to take the time to read and actually understand whatever it is that you’re critiquing, then take Representative  Faison’s advice and join the rest of us “in the land of reality.” 

Daniel Horwitz is a third year law student at Vanderbilt University Law School, where he is the Vice President of Law Students for Social Justice. He can be contacted at daniel.a.horwitz@vanderbilt.edu.

Top Stories

Lesbian scholar in the field of “womanist theology” to head Vandy theology school

Emilie M. Townes

Lesbian homosexual activist Emilie M. Townes, a distinguished Yale University scholar whose areas of expertise include Christian ethics and "womanist theology," has been named dean of Vanderbilt University Divinity School, effective July 1, 2013, pending board approval.

Womanist theology "is a religious conceptual framework which reconsiders and revises the traditions, practices, scriptures, and biblical interpretation with a special lens to empower and liberate African American women in America."  (link) As far as I can determine Womanist theology is blend of   Feminist theology , Black theology, and liberation theology.  

Townes is the author of Womanist Ethics and the Cultural Production of Evil and she pastored United Faith Affinitas, a Black LGBT  (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgendered) congregation in Chicago. She is also a blogger at The Huffington Post. She recently wed her same sex partner in Connecticut.

This appointment of a lesbian activist as Dean of Theology at Vanderbilt follows an earlier slap in the face to Christians, when in 2012 Vanderbilt announced that Christian student organizations could no longer require their leaders to be Christian. 

Top Stories

Stephen Siao of Vanderbilt College Republicans on Fox

Outgoing VCR president Stephen Siao and incoming president Abby Sutton will be on Fox & Friends at 6:50 AM EST/5:50 AM CST tomorrow morning to discuss the hypocrisies of Vanderbilt's "all-comers" policy and the pending bill/amendment in the legislature. I will not be up at 5:30 but if this is tuned into a YouTube video, I will watch it and post it.

Congratulations Stephen for making the big time and God bless you for fighting for liberty.

Top Stories

Dinesh D'Souza at Vanderbilt on “How Christianity Shaped America: Religious Liberty and Liberal Intolerance.”

Last night I had the pleasure of hearing Mr.  D’Souza speak at Vanderbilt University on the topic, “How Christianity Shaped America: Religious Liberty and Liberal Intolerance.”

 Mr. D’Souza is an American immigrant from India. He is the author of several best-selling books and regularly appears on TV news cast and talk shows. He has been called one of the "top young public-policy makers in the country" by Investor’s Business Daily and The New York Times Magazine named him one of America's most influential conservative thinkers. He is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and is the President of The King's College in New York City.

In his speech he defended Christianity and discussed the challenge of modern atheism and secularism. He spoke for a good 45 minutes and engaged in questions and answers for at least another 45 minutes. He was brilliant! He was thought-provoking, humorous at times, motivational and inspirational. Unlike many political speakers who preach and appeal to the emotions, D’Souza teaches, explains and reasons.

He made the point that Christianity changed the world and that our concepts of human rights and the worth of the individual are Christian concepts. He said that when there is a natural disaster somewhere in the world, that it is America and European countries of the world that send aid. China, Saudi Arabia and other countries have wealth but it is people in the Christianized world that feel they are their brother’s keepers. This concept of having a responsibility for the well being of others is not a Roman or Greek idea, but a Christian idea. In ancient Greece it was common practice to put an unwanted child out on a hillside to freeze to death. We do not have a record of the great philosophers on ancient Greece condemning this practice.

He said that in India, there is a saying that, “the tears of a stranger are as water.” In most of the history of the world, family or tribe was important, and compassion for others was unknown.

He answered the critics of religion and critics of Christianity who point out that horrible things have been done in the name of religion. Much of what is described as wars over religion are really not, he said. The battle between Israel and the Arabs is not over weather Abraham or Mohamed was the better prophet but is a battle over land. He said the war in Northern Ireland was not a war over religious doctrine but was a battle over political control.

To critics who bring up the worst of Christianity such as the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem witch trials, he pointed out that, while these things were terrible, the Spanish Inquisition lasted 400 years and a total of about 2000 people lost their lives or about five a year. In the Salem witch trials, a total of 19 people were killed. He said if you developed a balance sheet and compared those who were killed in the name of Christianity, compared to those killed in the name of atheism, on the atheist side you have the dead of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol Pot which adds up to many, many millions. The number killed in the name of Christianity cannot compare.

In the question and answer period one young man asked a question that has bother me, and I think many people who have ever examined their faith. The questioner asked how do you reconcile the horrors and genocide and partiality of God as reported in the Old Testament, to the gentle teachings of Jesus which teaches compassion and the value of the individual in the New Testament. D’Souza said that in his view, it is a mistake to view the Bible as a single book but it is rather a collection of books that cover generations. The Bible reveals an evolution of our concept of God as time progresses. God is “revealed” in the Bible over time, he said. He elaborated at length on this and I cannot recall the fine points of this theological argument, but I found it persuasive. Coming from a fundamentalist background, I have heard explanations that failed to satisfy or I have, more often than not, just seen this conflict between the nature of the early God and the nature of Jesus just ignored. I am sure D’sousa’s explanation would not be satisfactory to the more fundamentalist Christians who preach the Bible’s inerrant infallibility.
 

I asked Mr D’Douza about his thoughts about the current situation regarding Muslims in our community. I explained that in Murfreesboro, where a Muslim congregation is seeking to build a mosque, that there has been vocal and widespread opposition. Many of the opponents of the mosque, I explained, argue that Muslims should not have the right to build the mosque and are not entitled to freedom of religion. Those who take this position, I said, argue that Islam is not really a religion but a cult or a way of life or a political systems. Also I told him that there is widespread opposition to any workplace accommodations to Muslim and outrage whenever there is any accommodations.

Mr. D’Souza said that clearly Islam is a religion and a religion with a rich and long history. Islam helped improve the lot of mankind he said. He gave the example of the Bedouin and their practices before and after converting to Islam. He said clearly Muslims should have the rights of any other Americans. We should not make accommodations to practices that compromise our laws, such as we cannot excuse honor killings as an acceptable practice, but if one wants to bow and pray five times a day to Mecca that is a practice that hurts no one else.

A questioner asked Mr. D’Sousa his thoughts about the current situation on Vanderbilt campus which has adopted a policy that prohibits religious organization from discriminating. Under this new policy, a religious organization cannot require that students seeking to join the organization or become a leader of the organization agree with the principles of the organization. A Christian organization, under this new policy, cannot require that their members live what they see as a moral lifestyle or subscribe to the values and tenants of the organization.

The questioner pointed out that sororities and fraternities openly and unabashedly discriminate. These Greek organizations have selection committees and may fail to select someone because of their looks or because they are insufficiently wealthy or just because they don’t think the person would be a good “fit.” How, asked the questioner, can Vanderbilt allow these organizations to be selective and not allow religious organization?

 It is about power, said D’Sousa. Sororities and Fraternities have long established histories and alumni who contribute to the university. The University would not dare try to prohibit this type of discrimination. Vanderbilt being a private university, he said, has the right to establish whatever policy they want. This issue is not about Vanderbilt doing something illegal, but doing something that is wrong.

Of course, liberal academics do not see discriminating against Christians as wrong. Liberals delude themselves into thinking that their discrimination is moral and right and that the discrimination of others is wrong. Universities claim they seek diversity, but it is a certain type of diversity. They really don’t want diversity that includes conservatives or Christians. These people make them feel uncomfortable. They find them embarrassing.

Rod Williams, Dinesh D’Souza, and Gene Wisdom

Another reason this kind of discrimination is occurring is because Christians are not demanding enough. There is too much "turning the other cheek." He said that recently he was to have a debate at a college with an atheist and the Christian group sponsoring the debate said they would prefer that the event be billed as a “dialogue” rather than a debate. The difference, said Mr. D’Souza, between dialogue and a debate is that a dialogue is a debate where no one is allowed to win. It is this attitude of not wanting to appear pushy that puts Christians at a disadvantage. Christians are too meek and mild.

I am so glad I got to see Mr. D’Sousa speak and to meet him. He is a brilliant man and immensely likeable and he makes a strong defense of Christianity and Christianity’s contribution to the world. To learn more about Mr. D’Sousa follow this and this link.

Top Stories

Tell them you won't give Vanderbilt another dime

Why is Vanderbilt University forcing student groups to abandon their beliefs -- calling bigoted those who want their leaders to subscribe to their principles. Vanderbilt now demands these groups adopt a code of political correctness or be forced off campus. Now it's up to alumni to use their leverage. Call Board of Trust Members John Ingram and Orrin Ingram now. Tell them you won't give Vanderbilt another dime, until they respect religious freedom. Not another dime. Call the Ingram's now at 615.298.8200 and make voices heard.

Top Stories

Dinesh D’Souza Coming to Vanderbilt

Reposted from The Vanderbilt Torch 

On Thursday, April 19, renowned Conservative thinker and Christian apologist Dinesh D’Souza will be presenting a lecture titled “How Christianity Shaped America: Religious Liberty and Liberal Intolerance” at Vanderbilt University.

The lecture be held at 7 o’clock in Sarratt Cinema and will be over before Rites events kick off on Alumni Lawn that evening.

In the fall of 2010, Dinesh D’Souza was named the President of The King’s College in New York City. D’Souza brings to King’s a distinguished 25 year career as a writer, scholar and intellectual. A former policy analyst in the Reagan White House, D’Souza also served as an Olin Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute as well as a Rishwain Scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford.
Called one of the “top young public-policy makers in the country” by Investor’s Business Daily, D’Souza quickly became a major influence on public policy through his writings.

Illiberal Education, his first book publicized the phenomenon of political correctness in America’s colleges and universities and was on the best seller list for 15 weeks. Subsequent bestsellers include Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader, The Virtue of Prosperity, What’s So Great About America, Letters to a Young Conservative and What’s So Great About Christianity, and The Roots of Obama’s Rage. His latest work, Godforsaken, responds to the problem of evil.

A prolific, writer, persuasive debater, and sought after speaker on college campuses as well as many other venues, D’Souza has been named one of America’s most influential conservative thinkers by the New York Times.

The lecture is open to the public and free of charge and is sponsored by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and The Vanderbilt Torch.

Join the Facebook event here: https://www.facebook.com/events/334912846572152/

Top Stories

Vanderbilt Christian Groups, Citing Religious Freedom, Follow Catholics Off Campus

By Annalisa Musarra, Religion News Service

(RNS) A coalition of 11 Christian student groups at Vanderbilt University are insisting their leaders should be chosen based on shared faith -- the newest front in a growing battle over "religious freedom."

The campus groups, who call themselves Vanderbilt Solidarity, joined together to oppose the university's "all-comers" policy, which says student groups must be open to all students, including in leadership, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion. (link)

The alumni association needs to follow suit and take the endowment with them.

Top Stories

Healthcare Panel Hosted by YAL@VU, tonight

Young Americans for Liberty at Vanderbilt will be hosting a healthcare panel on the evening of Monday, March 26th,  7:00pm until 8:00pm. Held in Buttrick 206, this panel will feature ophthalmologist Dr. Ming Wang and MediBid CEO Ralph Weber. Free food and drinks will be provided to attendees.

Panel descriptions:

Surviving cultural revolution in China and appreciating freedom and choice in America - Dr. Ming Wang, Harvard & MIT (MD, magna cum laude); PhD (laser physics)
In this lecture, Dr. Wang will talk about his experience of growing up as a teenager during China's Cultural Revolution and his effort to escape the devastating fate of deportation and a lifetime of poverty. He will talk about how he came to America for freedom with just $50 in his pocket. He will also talk about his "Great American question", about why the principles of freedom and choice took root in this country and how important it is to realize how precious that is and the need to protect it.

The effect of ObamaCare on the current student generation - Ralph Weber
Ralph F. Weber is a Canadian philanthropic entrepreneur, writer, Certified Financial Planner, Registered Employee Benefits Consultant, Chartered Life Underwriter, and Chartered Financial Consultant. Weber's goal is to create a free-market health care system to help patients save money. He regularly contributes articles and speaks at public and private functions to promote awareness of domestic medical tourism, patient rights, and the economics of health care.

Top Stories

Rally for Religious Liberty denounces the "Rape of the Soul."

Rally for Religious Freedom, Nashville

A crowd of about 500 to 700 gathered on the south steps of the Capitol today for a noon rally for religious liberty. I arrived late and missed earlier remarks but as I was walking across the Memorial Plaza, Carol Swain, a Professor of Law and Political Science at Vanderbilt University, was wrapping up her remarks, denouncing the trend across the nation of curtailing religious freedom on college campuses.

 Recently, Vanderbilt University placed five longtime extracurricular religious groups on "provisional status" — jeopardizing their continued role on campus — because these groups required their leaders to share the groups' core religious beliefs. In so doing, the University abandoned its long tradition of religious tolerance, forcing the groups into adopting moral viewpoints contrary to thousands of years of Judeo-Christian teaching. This new policy of religious intolerance is being justified in the name of "diversity."  Professor Swain has been a champion for religious liberty on Vanderbilt campus.

Richard Land

Richard Land President of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention gave a rousing speech denouncing the Obama administration for forcing the Catholic Church to provide contraception coverage to women who are employed by Church entities. He said that President Obama had offered to make accommodation to the Church. “Who do they think they are,“ he rhetorically asked to enthusiastic applause. "It is not up to the government to grant concessions," he explained. “The restrictions in the First Amendment are on the government; not the people,” he said. He quoted Roger Williams saying that when government forces one to violate their conscience it is, “rape of the soul.”

The rally was a testimony to the ecumenical nature of the fight for religious liberty. I remember a time when Catholics and Baptist would not have occupied the same stage. Several nuns were in the audience and several people attending the rally held signs which would indicate they were Catholic. Other speakers and a singer, were probably protestants but their religious affiliation was not mentioned. The closing prayer was by a Lutheran minister.

I missed her remarks if she spoke, but on the stage was Bobbie Patray of Tennessee Eagle Forum. I did not get her name, but a lady delivered a  beautiful and emotional a cappella rendition of "Glory, Glory, Hallelujah."

People leaving the rally for Religious Liberty

This was a great event. Like never before in recent history, the government and secular institutions are waging war on people of faith. All of us who cherish liberty must come to the defense of those whose religious liberty is under attack.


For other coverage of this event see below:

Hundreds Attend Nashville ‘Rally For Religious Freedom'

Rally for Religious Freedom today at Capitol

Crowd gathers for religious freedom rally at Capitol Hill

  video coverage of today's rally Top Stories - Protesters Call for Political Revival at State Capitol

Top Stories