Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Which Rights Are Threatened by the Federal Government?
Which Rights Are Threatened by the Federal Government?
Jul 3, 2026 5:22 AM

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that a majority of Americans now believe the federal government threatens their own personal rights and freedoms:

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Jan. 9-13 among 1,502 adults, finds that 53% think that the federal government threatens their own personal rights and freedoms while 43% disagree.

In March 2010, opinions were divided over whether the government represented a threat to personal freedom; 47% said it did while 50% disagreed. In surveys between 1995 and 2003, majorities rejected the idea that the government threatened people’s rights and freedoms.

The growing view that the federal government threatens personal rights and freedoms has been led by conservative Republicans. Currently 76% of conservative Republicans say that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms and 54% describe the government as a “major” threat. Three years ago, 62% of conservative Republicans said the government was a threat to their freedom; 47% said it was a major threat.

The fact that38% of Democrats say the government poses a threat to personal rights and freedoms and 16% view it as a major threat, shows that it’s not just a partisan issue. But while there may be agreement thatthe federal government threatens our rights and freedoms, there is likely to be divergence of opinion on which rights and freedoms are beingthreatened. Rather than just having people respond with yes or no to the question, “Federal government threatens your personal freedom?”, it would be helpful for respondents to explain what they mean.

We could, for instance, have them go down the list of rights in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights and point out which they feel arethreatened. Like most Americans, I’m no legal scholar. But here is how I would respond:

Amendment: First Amendment

Enumerated rights: Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition

Status check: Although religious liberties have been eroding for some time, the recent controversy over theHHS contraceptive mandate has brought a renewed interest to the very real threats posed by the federal government. AsKyle Duncan, General Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, recently said, “The administration obviously realizes that the HHS mandate puts constitutional rights at risk.” Indeed, they do—and they don’t care. The Obama administration believes in a watered-down “right to worship” rather than a robust freedom of religious.

Threat level: Serious threat

Amendment: Second Amendment

Enumerated rights:Right to keep and bear arms

Status check:No enumerated Constitutionallyguaranteedright outrages andembarrassesliberal Americans more than the Second Amendment. Their goal of disarming the country and instituting a total ban on all firearms is frustratingly checked by thirteen words: “theright of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Fortunately, recent Supreme Court rulings have ruled that those words have meaning and so the threats to this right have been somewhat constrained.

Threat level: Real, but limited

Amendment: Third Amendment

Enumerated rights:Protection from quartering of troops.

Status check:Take heart, America: there is a least one enumerated right thatthe federal government is not likely to violate anytime soon.

Threat level: No threat

Amendment: Fourth Amendment

Enumerated rights:Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

Status check:Considering that the biggest threat is the x-ray screening by the TSA at the airport, this right is still fairly secure.

Threat level: No serious threats

Amendment:Fifth amendment

Enumerated rights:due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

Status check: In 2005,the Supreme Court ruling inKelo vs. City of New Londonexpanded the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development. The Court held that the general benefits munity enjoyed from economic growth qualified private redevelopment plans as a permissible “public use” under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. So your private property is probably secure as long as some government-backed developer doesn’t want to replace your house with a strip mall.

Threat level: Continuous

Amendment:Sixth Amendment

Enumerated rights:Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

Status check:Your right to a have a counsel represent you in a public trial by a jury of your peers is secure—unless President Obama puts you on his “kill list.” If that happens then an “informed, high-level official of the U.S. government” can authorize a drone strike to wipe our you and your Sixth Amendment rights.

Threat level: Serious, but limited in scope

Amendment:Seventh Amendment

Enumerated rights:Civil trial by jury.

Status check:Like the Third Amendment, the right protected by the Seventh appears to be fairly secure.

Threat level: No general threats.

Amendment:Eighth Amendment

Enumerated rights:Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Status check: I haven’t had to post bail in awhile so I’m not sure what’s considered excessive.

Threat level: No threat?

Amendment:Ninth Amendment

Enumerated rights:Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

Status check:The Ninth Amendment was added to the Bill of Rights to ensure that fundamental rights could not be denied simply because they were not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. How this affects individual right is open to interpretation.

Threat level: No threat?

Amendment:Tenth Amendment

Enumerated rights: Powers of States and people.

Status check:The Tenth Amendment states that, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Since FDR’s New Deal legislation,the merce clause” has trumped the Tenth Amendment, allowing the federal government to take almost any powers it wants from the States and the people.

Threat level: Has been threatened so long that the amendment is all but meaningless.

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
The Uniqueness of Christian Ecology – Abundance
"Here is a boy with five small barley loaves and two small fish, but how far will they go among so many?" [John 6:9] Among all the many good things going on last weekend in Boise, I (and a few others) noticed something a bit disconcerting. The way many of the topics were covered shows how prone Christians are to being consumed by doom and gloom messages of scarcity and lack and overpopulation and an "ever smaller earth." While it’s...
Pentecostalism, Poverty, and the Global South
Related to last week’s post about Reformed education and Pentecostalism, I point you to this post by Rod Dreher, who discusses his interview with Josiah Idowu-Fearon, the Anglican Archbishop of Kaduna state in Nigeria. Dreher relates the following: Pentecostalism is growing like wildfire, but there’s less to it than you might think. He said that in many cases, people are drawn to the emotional experience, and can tell you exactly when they gave their life to Jesus — but can’t...
Faith, Funding, and Substance Abuse
Why might there be “increasing participation by religious organizations in offering substance abuse treatment funded by federal government vouchers”? Perhaps because, at least in part, “A program’s faith element relates to the people they serve and the type of help they provide, as programs with more explicit and mandatory faith-related elements are likely to be substance-abuse programs.” Thus, the more explicitly faith-filled substance abuse programs will increasingly face a special temptation to take federal funds for such purposes. And this...
C.S. Lewis vs. Sigmund Freud
Awhile back, I finished reading Armand Nicholi’s book, The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life. Dr. Nicholi is an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard and has taught a seminar on Freud & Lewis at Harvard for the past 35 years. The course eventually led to this book and a PBS series by the same name. The book is an interesting read for anyone modestly interested in one or...
Positive Freedom and Paternal Government
A quote from T. H. Green, refuting the view that the law’s “only business is to prevent interference with the liberty of the individual,” construed as doing what you like as long as it does not infringe on others’ rights to do what they want. Green writes: The true ground of objection to ‘paternal government’ is not that it violates the ‘laissez faire’ principle and conceives that its office is to make people good, to promote morality, but that it...
Mugabe: Rotten from the Start
An interesting article in the Los Angeles Times detailing how badly wrong Robert Mugabe’s supporters in the West have been from the very beginning (requires “free” registration; may I suggest BugMeNot?): From the beginning of his political career, Mugabe was not just a Marxist but one who repeatedly made clear his intention to run Zimbabwe as an authoritarian, one-party state. Characteristic of this historical revisionism is former Newsweek southern Africa correspondent Joshua Hammer, writing recently in the liberal Washington Monthly...
Two Perspectives on Climate Change
These two brief essays provide a good juxtaposition of two perspectives that view immediate and mandated action to reduce carbon emissions as either morally obligatory or imprudent. For the former, see Vaclav Havel’s, “Our Moral Footprint,” which states rhetorically, “It is also obvious from published research that human activity is a cause of change; we just don’t know how big its contribution is. Is it necessary to know that to the last percentage point, though? By waiting for incontrovertible precision,...
Clarence Thomas Interviews
You are probably aware by now that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has published a memoir. The interview-avoiding judge has lately been giving, as Kathryn Jean Lopez puts it, “a lifetime of interviews.” Given the controversy surrounding his public life since his nomination to the Court, not much remains to be said about him, good or bad, that has not already been said. Suffice it to say that I draw attention to him now because: 1) My own view is...
Patterson Stops Too Short In Jena Six New York Times Piece
Orlando Patterson, professor of sociology at Harvard University, penned a challenging piece on Jena 6 and our current racial tensions. I have learned much from Patterson over the years. For example, he was the first person to help me realize that we often confuse issues of race and class in America by assuming the race as the single variable accounting for the cyclical plight of poor blacks. In a September 30th New York Times op-ed piece Patterson rightly says that...
One More Reason the Government Shouldn’t Subsidize Ethanol
Excerpts from Clifford Krauss’ article in the New York Times (cross-posted at )… The ethanol boom of recent years — which spurred a frenzy of distillery construction, record corn prices, rising food prices and hopes of a new future for rural America — may be fading. Only last year, farmers here spoke of a biofuel gold rush, and they rejoiced as prices for ethanol and the corn used to produce it set records. panies and farm cooperatives have built so...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved