Introduction
In "Engines of Liberty," David Cole explores the often-overlooked role of citizen activists in shaping constitutional law and driving social change in the United States. While we often attribute significant historical changes to presidents and other powerful individuals, Cole argues that it's actually grassroots movements and dedicated activists who are the true engines of liberty.
This book takes us on a journey through some of the most important civil rights battles of recent decades, showing how ordinary citizens and advocacy groups have fought tirelessly to expand rights and freedoms for all Americans. From the struggle for marriage equality to gun rights and human rights in the War on Terror, Cole demonstrates that change doesn't just come from the top down, but from the bottom up.
The Long Road to Marriage Equality
A Custody Battle Sparks a Movement
The path to nationwide marriage equality in the United States was long and winding, with many twists and turns along the way. Cole begins this story in an unexpected place: a child custody case in Vermont in the early 1990s.
Susan Bellemare and Susan Hamilton were a lesbian couple raising Hamilton's biological son, Collin. When Hamilton tragically died in a car accident, her parents sued for custody of Collin, not wanting him to be raised by Bellemare. After a two-year legal battle, Bellemare won custody thanks to a will Hamilton had prepared. But the case highlighted how few rights same-sex partners had under the law.
This custody battle became a catalyst for gay rights activists in Vermont. They realized that without legal recognition, same-sex couples and their families were vulnerable. A group of activists, including three same-sex couples, decided to sue the state of Vermont for denying them marriage licenses.
These couples were carefully chosen to challenge stereotypes about gay people. They had stable jobs, long-term relationships, and some were raising children. Their case made its way through the courts, and in 1999, the Vermont Supreme Court made a landmark ruling: The state constitution required that same-sex couples be granted the same rights and benefits as heterosexual married couples.
While this didn't immediately lead to full marriage equality, it paved the way for civil unions in Vermont. Activists continued to push, and in 2009, Vermont became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote rather than a court order.
The Battle in California
As the fight for marriage equality gained momentum, California became a key battleground. In 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom made headlines by ordering the city to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, even though they weren't legally recognized at the time.
This bold move sparked years of intense activism and legal battles. In June 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that banning same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, legalizing it in the state. But the victory was short-lived.
Conservative groups quickly mobilized, gathering signatures to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would define marriage as between a man and a woman. This became known as Proposition 8, and it sparked a fierce campaign battle. Both sides spent around $40 million trying to sway voters.
One ad in particular proved pivotal: It featured a young girl telling her parents she learned in school that she could marry a woman when she grew up. This ad played on fears about how same-sex marriage might affect children and education, and it helped tip the balance. Proposition 8 passed with 52% of the vote, banning same-sex marriage in California once again.
But activists didn't give up. They immediately challenged Proposition 8 in court. After a series of legal battles, the case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a twist, by this point no state officials were willing to defend Proposition 8, showing how quickly public opinion had shifted. The Supreme Court ultimately let a lower court ruling stand, making same-sex marriage legal in California once again.
The Supreme Court's Landmark Decision
The fight for marriage equality continued to gain momentum across the country. In 2013, John Arthur and James Obergefell, a couple from Ohio, traveled to Maryland to get married because John was dying from ALS and same-sex marriage wasn't legal in their home state. When Ohio refused to recognize their marriage, they sued the state.
This case eventually made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, forcing the justices to confront the issue of same-sex marriage head-on. It was a weighty decision: If they ruled in favor of Obergefell, it would change the traditional definition of marriage and require all states to recognize same-sex marriages.
Some justices were hesitant. Justice Antonin Scalia argued that such a major social change should be left to voters and state legislatures. But on June 26, 2015, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to marry is fundamental and applies equally to same-sex couples under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Court provided four main reasons for its decision:
- The freedom to choose who you marry is a fundamental right for all people.
- Marriage supports the right to intimate association, which is important for personal autonomy.
- Marriage provides legal protections that benefit children of same-sex parents.
- Marriage comes with numerous rights and benefits that should be available to all couples.
This landmark ruling was the culmination of decades of activism, showing how grassroots movements can ultimately change the course of constitutional law.
The Fight for Gun Rights
The NRA's State-by-State Strategy
While the battle for marriage equality was unfolding, another group of activists was fighting for a very different cause: gun rights. Cole shows how the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other pro-gun groups have used similar tactics to expand gun rights across the country.
The NRA's strategy focused heavily on state-level activism, with Florida emerging as a key battleground. Marion Hammer, a longtime NRA lobbyist and the organization's first female president, played a crucial role in shaping Florida's gun laws.
In 2005, thanks to Hammer's lobbying efforts, Florida became the first state to pass a "stand your ground" law. This controversial law allows people to use deadly force in self-defense without first trying to retreat, even in public spaces. The passage of this law demonstrated the power of knowing where to focus lobbying efforts for maximum impact.
Presidential Influence and the Supreme Court
The NRA also benefited from having allies in high places. In 2007, pro-gun activists faced a major challenge when a lawsuit in Virginia threatened to ban the sale of guns in the area. The situation looked dire, especially after a mass shooting at Virginia Tech that same year.
However, the timing worked in the NRA's favor. President George W. Bush had recently appointed two pro-gun justices to the Supreme Court: John Roberts and Samuel Alito. In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a major victory for gun rights activists by declaring Virginia's gun ban unconstitutional.
This case highlights how the appointment of sympathetic justices can have a profound impact on constitutional interpretation and policy outcomes. It also shows how activists can play the long game, working to influence who gets appointed to key positions of power.
Righting Historical Wrongs
The Japanese Internment and the Power of Persistence
Cole next turns to a dark chapter in American history: the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. This story illustrates how even when the Supreme Court makes a terrible error, decades of persistent activism can eventually bring the truth to light and force the government to acknowledge its mistakes.
In February 1942, shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the internment of all people of Japanese descent living on the West Coast. Over 110,000 people, many of them American citizens, were forced into camps.
Fred Korematsu, an American-born son of Japanese immigrants, refused to comply with the order and was arrested. The American Civil Liberties Union took up his case, arguing that the internment order was unlawful and discriminatory. However, in 1944, the Supreme Court ruled against Korematsu, deciding that the internment was justifiable given the circumstances of war.
For decades, civil rights activists continued to fight against this injustice. Their persistent efforts led President Jimmy Carter to launch an investigative committee in 1979. The committee urged President Ronald Reagan to acknowledge the Supreme Court's error, but Reagan initially refused.
The turning point came when new evidence emerged. It was revealed that key information had been withheld from the Supreme Court in 1944. Contrary to claims made at the time, investigations by the FBI and FCC had found no evidence of suspicious activity among Japanese American communities on the West Coast.
Faced with this new information, Reagan finally issued an official apology to Korematsu in 1988. The government also provided $20,000 in compensation to each surviving Japanese American who had been interned.
This story demonstrates the power of persistent activism to correct even long-standing injustices. It took over four decades, but activists eventually forced the government to acknowledge its mistake and take steps to make amends.
Human Rights in the War on Terror
Exposing Abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo
The fight for human rights didn't end with World War II. Cole shows how activists have played a crucial role in exposing and challenging human rights abuses in the War on Terror.
When reports of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq began to emerge in 2003, human rights activists sprang into action. Lawyers Jameel Jaffer and Amrit Singh used the Freedom of Information Act to uncover shocking details about the treatment of detainees.
They discovered documents showing that President Bush had authorized the CIA to secretly detain and interrogate suspects without legal protections. Other documents revealed disturbing incidents, including prisoners dying after severe interrogations, soldiers defecating on the Koran, and detainees being subjected to sensory deprivation.
The lawyers also found evidence that soldiers who reported prisoner abuse were threatened and told to keep quiet. These revelations helped build public pressure for change and accountability.
In 2006, Jaffer and Singh turned their attention to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Their investigations revealed that contrary to government claims, only a small percentage of detainees had credible links to Al Qaeda or the Taliban. They also uncovered how detainees were denied access to lawyers and proper legal representation.
These findings contradicted the government's narrative about Guantanamo and showed how basic principles of justice were being violated. Eventually, the Supreme Court intervened, ruling that the practices at Guantanamo violated the Geneva Conventions and that these international laws protecting prisoners of war must be followed.
The Drone Program and the Power of Public Pressure
Even after the election of President Barack Obama, who had campaigned on a platform of hope and change, human rights activists found themselves challenging government policies. One major issue was the secret drone program used to target and kill suspected enemies abroad.
When reports of the drone program first emerged, the Obama administration refused to acknowledge its existence, citing agreements with countries like Yemen and Pakistan that allowed the U.S. to launch drones from their territory.
Human rights organizations like the New America Foundation began tracking drone strikes and documenting their impact. They even brought a 9-year-old Pakistani girl to testify before Congress about how her grandmother had been killed by a U.S. drone strike.
This mounting public pressure eventually forced the Obama administration to change course. In May 2013, Obama publicly acknowledged the drone program for the first time and announced new restrictions on its use. Drones would now only be used against serious threats to Americans, and only when there was near-certainty that no civilians would be harmed.
As a result of these new guidelines, the number of drone strikes and civilian casualties dropped dramatically. In Pakistan, deaths from drone strikes fell from 471 (including 100 civilians) in 2009 to just 35 (with no reported civilian casualties) in 2014.
This case shows how persistent activism and public pressure can force even the most powerful government in the world to change its policies and become more transparent.
The Power of Citizen Activism
Throughout "Engines of Liberty," David Cole makes a compelling case for the importance of grassroots activism in shaping constitutional law and driving social change. While we often focus on the role of presidents, legislators, and judges, Cole argues that it's really citizen activists who are the true engines of liberty.
Here are some key lessons from the book:
Persistence pays off: Many of the victories described in the book took years or even decades to achieve. The fight for marriage equality, the effort to right the wrong of Japanese internment, and the battle against human rights abuses in the War on Terror all required sustained effort over long periods of time.
Strategy matters: Successful activists are strategic about where and how they fight their battles. The NRA's focus on Florida as a key state for gun rights legislation, and the careful selection of plaintiffs in early same-sex marriage cases, show how important it is to choose the right battlegrounds and messengers.
Public opinion is powerful: Politicians and judges are not immune to public pressure. By shaping public opinion through advocacy, education, and media campaigns, activists can create an environment where change becomes possible or even inevitable.
Information is a powerful tool: Many of the successes described in the book came from activists uncovering and publicizing information. Whether it was exposing abuses at Abu Ghraib or revealing the truth about Japanese internment, bringing hidden facts to light was often a crucial step in driving change.
The law is a living thing: Cole's book shows how constitutional interpretation can evolve over time in response to changing social norms and persistent advocacy. What seems impossible or unconstitutional in one era can become accepted law in another.
Everyone can make a difference: The stories in "Engines of Liberty" involve not just lawyers and professional activists, but also ordinary citizens who stood up for what they believed in. This suggests that everyone has the potential to contribute to positive social change.
Conclusion
"Engines of Liberty" offers an inspiring and empowering message about the potential for ordinary citizens to shape the course of history. By highlighting the crucial role of activists in some of the most significant legal and social changes of recent decades, David Cole reminds us that democracy is not just about voting every few years, but about active, ongoing engagement in the issues that matter to us.
The book serves as a powerful rebuttal to cynicism and apathy. It shows that even when facing seemingly insurmountable odds, dedicated individuals and groups can eventually prevail. Whether it's expanding rights for marginalized groups, challenging government overreach, or pushing for greater transparency and accountability, citizen activists have proven time and again that they can be a formidable force for change.
At the same time, "Engines of Liberty" is a call to action. It suggests that the work of preserving and expanding liberty is never truly finished. New challenges will always arise, and it will be up to engaged citizens to meet them. By understanding the strategies and tactics that have worked in the past, we can be better prepared to fight for justice and equality in the future.
Ultimately, Cole's book is a testament to the resilience of American democracy and the power of collective action. It reminds us that the true strength of a nation lies not just in its institutions or leaders, but in the willingness of its citizens to stand up for their rights and the rights of others. In doing so, it offers hope and inspiration for anyone who has ever dreamed of making the world a little bit better.