Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Constitution protects nonprofits despite political activism
Constitution protects nonprofits despite political activism
Dec 11, 2025 1:48 PM

Challenge the political agenda of the Gates and Ford Foundations, but do not use means that undermine the very rule of law that should be defended.

Read More…

A healthy state protects life, secures liberty, and defends property. A totalitarian state does the opposite: it arbitrarily pels, and seizes property.

J. D. Vance recently appeared on Fox News with Tucker Carlson to discuss a verbal altercation between Arizona State University students, one of whom was the recipient of a Ford Foundation fellowship.

The Republican Ohio Senate candidate made a broad critique of foundations and universities that get tax privileges as philanthropies but engage in left-wing political activism. Vance first suggested an extensive examination of the legal, regulatory and tax structures governing nonprofits to ensure they aren’t merely shell organizations concealing political action groups.

But at the end of the interview, he crossed into dangerous ground advocating government seizure and redistribution of the assets of the Gates and Ford foundations and similar entities that are actively promoting leftist politics, critical race theory, the sexual revolutionand the woke agenda.

This an outright rejection of the rule of law, a key idea and tactic of the socialist and leftist agenda he claims to be fighting.

Vance is correct that the Ford and Gates foundations promote harmful ideologies in the U.S. and abroad. The current regulatory structures should be reviewed. But his call to seize assets encourages an authoritarian use of state power that is dangerous and unjust.

There’s also no doubt that the country faces an increasingly dire political situation that goes deeper than electoral politics. The U.S. is in an anthropological battle over the nature of the person, marriage, the rights of parentsand the nation’s democratic traditions.

At this point it appears there will be no place promise. The legalization of same-sex marriage, the redefinition of genderand the recent congressional push to codify a right to abortion are gross denials of the separations of powers.

The state is attempting to redefine biological realities and usher in a new ontology of the person that violates reason and science but that requires absolute obedience. The woke agenda seeks to usurp the rights and authority of parents, redefine the meaning of justice and bypass due process and the rule of law. And wealthy foundations often work in various ways to fund this new vision of the person and undermine principles of justice.

To reclaim a richer view of the human person and a vision of society rooted in justice and due process is an ongoing and admirable struggle. And that is why Vance’s call to “seize” the assets of his political enemies and “redistribute” them to his political allies should be rejected.

At a minimum, this is bad political strategy.

While it might get him some votes, it could provoke the current administration to attack conservative groups. But more importantly, Vance’s proposal is a rejection of the rule of law and the very foundations of the American and British political traditions, from the Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights.

He departs from the medieval tradition of law and due process articulated by thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, and from the principle of impartial justice found in the Jewish and Christian scriptures, from Leviticus to James. Sadly, Tucker Carlson failed to press Vance on his zealous proposal.

Vance argued that conservatives need to wake up to the perverse influence of these multibillion-dollar foundations. Undoubtedly so. But seizing legally acquired assets is an affront to the Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights, which protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Would Vance dispose of the Second Amendment or the Sixth Amendment and confiscate guns or deny trial by jury because of the current cultural and political crisis?

Vance is right that something must be done as the left continues its incessant march through our institutions. But righteous anger, spiritednessand enthusiasm must be rooted in prudence and respect for justice.

Sociologist Philip Rief famously wrote that “culture is the form of fighting before the firing begins.” Yet, as the best of the Western tradition teaches us, not only war, but politics and culture, too, must be fought in accordance with principles of justice.

A leftist relativist approach to justifying an indiscriminate use of power against “the enemy” undermines constitutional rights and the rule of law, which must be defended at all costs.

This article originally appeared in The Detroit News on Oct. 13, 2021.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
A Wesleyan Approach to Faith, Work, and Economic Transformation
“[Wealth] is an excellent gift of God, answering the noblest ends. In the hands of his children, it is food for the hungry, drink for the thirsty, raiment for the naked: It gives to the traveller and the stranger where to lay his head. By it we may supply the place of an husband to the widow, and of a father to the fatherless. We may be a defence for the oppressed, a means of health to the sick, of...
What Liberal Evangelicals Should Know About the Economic Views of Conservative Evangelicals
We read the same Bible and follow the same Jesus. We go to the same churches and even agree on the same social issues. So why then do liberal and conservative evangelicals tend to disagree so often about economic issues? The answer most frequently given is that both sides simply baptize whatever political and economic views they already believe. While this is likely to be partially true, I don’t think it is a sufficient explanation for the views of more...
Business and the Option for the Poor
There is no reason to assume that the preferential option for the poor is somehow a preferential option for big government, says Acton research director Samuel Gregg. Gregg writes that lifting people out of poverty — and not just material poverty but also moral and spiritual poverty — does not necessarily mean that the most effective action is to implement yet another welfare program: What does living out the option for the poor mean in practice? We must engage in...
What Does Religious Liberty Stand Upon?
With everything from the HHS mandate to Duck Dynasty to Sister Wives, there is much in the news regarding religious liberty. What are we to make of it? Is religious liberty simply being tolerant of others’ religious choices? Michael Therrien, at First Things, wants to clear up the discussion, from the Catholic point of view. He starts by looking at an article quoting Camille Paglia, atheist, lesbian and university professor. In it, Paglia rushes to the defense of Phil Robertson,...
Video & Audio: Why Libertarians Need God
The 2014Acton Lecture Seriesgot underway last week with an address from Jay Richards on the topic of “Why Libertarians Need God.” In his address, Richards argued that core libertarian principles of individual rights, freedom and responsibility, reason, moral truth, and limited government make little sense in an atheistic and materialist context, but make far more sense when grounded in a theistic belief system. The video of the full lecture is available below; I’ve embedded the audio after the jump. ...
Explainer: The Hobby Lobby Amicus Briefs
Last week, over 80 amicus briefs were filed with the Supreme Court on both sides of Hobby Lobby’s challenge to the HHS contraceptive-abortifacient mandate. Here’s what you need to know about amicus briefs and their role in this case. What is an amicus brief? An amicus brief is a learned treatise submitted by an amicus curiae (Latin for “friend of the court”), someone who is not a party to a case who offers information that bears on the case but...
Hobby Lobby Owners Speak Out on HHS Mandate
In a new video from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the Green Family, owners of the embattled retail chain, Hobby Lobby, discusses the religious foundation of their business and the threat the federal government now poses to those who share their beliefs. “What’s at stake here is whether you’re able to keep your religious freedom when you open a family business,” says Lori Windham, Senior Council at The Becket Fund, “whether you can continue to live out your faith...
Post-Super Bowl Thoughts on Theology and America
How ’bout them Seahawks? As a Chicago Bears fan the answer to that question means very little to me, but I did enjoy the annual ritual of binge-eating and loudly talking over friends and loved ones who gathered together around the TV for Super Bowl 48. One thing that stood out was the tradition of having various NFL players and civil servants recite the Declaration of Independence before the game. Some of the powerful (and unmistakably religious) lines from our...
‘Breeders:’ A Cautionary Tale
The Center for Bioethics and Culture (CBC) is an mitted to “bioethical issues” such as surrogacy, stem cell research and human cloning, amongst other issues. They have recently produced a documentary entitled “Breeders: a subclass of women?” It is a cautionary tale, and a very sad one. The film focuses on women who chose to be surrogates (one chose surrogacy several times), and the turmoil that arose. The issue of es down to the buying and selling of children, one...
Audio: Samuel Gregg Discusses ‘Tea Party Catholic’
Acton Institute Director of Research Samuel Gregg joined host Mike Murray on his show “Faith, Culture and Politics” on the Guadalupe Radio Network to discuss his latest book, Tea Party Catholic. The interview lasted nearly a half an hour, and you can listen to it via the audio player below. ...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved