810 years later, are we living up to Magna Carta?
This month, Magna Carta, or the Great Charter, celebrates its 810th birthday. To commemorate the occasion, I recently made a pilgrimage to London’s British Library to visit one of the few surviving original copies of the 1215 charter.
While hordes of tourists huddled around framed scraps of handwritten Beatles lyrics and Jane Austen relics, I made my way to an abandoned corner of the darkly lit display room, where a 1225 copy of the Great Charter sat quietly in its display case.
As I stood reverently paying my respects, I wondered if the other visitors understood the weight this ancient parchment carried. Sure, it may not evoke the same excitement as Paul McCartney’s scribbled beginnings of “Hey Jude,” but this unassuming piece of paper has undeniably made a bigger impact on their lives than any other item within those museum walls.
Magna Carta is universally recognized as the first written restraint on unchecked power. Created to rein in the unruly King John, its powerful message of limited government and individual liberty has spread far beyond England, directly influencing the constitutions and legal systems of nations all over the world. Indeed, our own United States Constitution was conceived in the spirit of that Great Charter. But have we managed to keep that spirit alive today?
As we reflect on over eight centuries of Magna Carta, we ought to take stock of the current state of our own U.S. Constitution and ask ourselves if we are living up to those values upon which our country was built.
The rule of law
In 1215, England’s land barons had reached their breaking point. For too long, King John had abused his power by exercising arbitrary justice, denying due process, implementing heavy taxes, stealing property, and extorting the barons—along with a host of other atrocities. Under the customary (but unwritten) laws of the land, the barons and the king had an understood agreement. The king gave the barons land, and in exchange, the barons pledged loyalty, payment of feudal dues, military provisions, and the promise they would rule justly over their people. The king, in turn, also promised to rule justly and adhere to the common laws of the time.
But King John had a nasty habit of falling short on his end of the bargain: He routinely disrespected the barons and their subjects. As part of his itinerant kingship, King John traveled the country and visited his baron’s fiefs, consuming the people’s food and community resources on a whim. During these visits, the king took full control over barons’ land and offered no compensation for their losses.
As for justice, King John had no heart for it. John was infamous for arbitrarily imprisoning barons at will, stripping them of their land, imposing excessive fines, and denying due process and jury trials. No one was safe. The baron William de Braose had been a favorite of King John until a disagreement between the two men dissolved their friendship. Seeking revenge, John demanded that William pay him large amounts of money he allegedly owed in taxes and past debts. William fled to Ireland and as retribution, King John imprisoned William’s wife and son, who later died of starvation whilst in captivity.
The king’s many trespasses on the rights of the barons eventually resulted in a civil war between the two parties. When the barons captured London, their victory was imminent. They promptly began drafting their demands in what was called the “Articles of the Barons,” the outline for what would later become the Great Charter.
Magna Carta lore tells us that the barons surrounded King John at sword’s point, forcing him to affix the royal seal to Magna Carta. In truth, the event wasn’t quite that exciting.
After John realized he was losing, the two parties agreed to meet at Runnymede, a meadow 25 miles outside London. Runnymede was not chosen at random. Since Saxon times, Runnymede had been used as neutral territory where disputing parties met to settle their disagreements. In Old English, the name Runnymede translates to “the meeting meadow.”
While the meeting was pre-planned and unfolded over the course of several days—the king wasn’t exactly thrilled to agree to the terms. There may not have been swords at his throat, but he affixed his seal to the Great Charter under great duress from both political and military pressure. Had he refused downright, it’s likely that swords may have been drawn.
With the king’s seal in place, Magna Carta was now the official law of the land, binding the king to the rule of law—not the rule of whim. Under the Great Charter, the king could no longer take the barons’ land as he pleased, nor could he imprison and fine them without due process. He was bound by the restraints of Magna Carta.
As Clause 39 of the Great Charter states:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.
Unfortunately, the document’s legitimacy would be called into question almost immediately after Runnymede, causing yet another civil war. But the document’s legacy could not be erased. Magna Carta was forever solidified as a symbol that no man was above the law and that individuals had certain unalienable rights. A revolutionary idea that made a big impact across the pond several centuries later.
How far have we strayed?
The American colonists were no strangers to Magna Carta, and as British subjects, they knew its history well. Inspired by the barons’ just rebellion against King John, the colonists embarked on their own revolt against King George, who appeared to have forgotten that kings could not rule without limits.
It is clear when reading the Declaration of Independence that the spirit of Magna Carta is present throughout its entire text. This was no coincidence, but rather, it was done with precise and careful intent that would later carry over into the drafting of the U.S. Constitution.
Yet, despite Magna Carta’s impact on our Constitution, the country has fallen short at upholding these principles today.
Today, Magna’s Carta’s influence is in jeopardy. The Constitution’s separation of powers was included to ensure that no man, and especially no branch of government, is above the law. But over time, the executive branch has usurped the role of not only the legislature, but of the judiciary as well. Executive agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and the Consumer Product Safety Commission make and enforce their own laws outside of Congress. To make matters worse, many agencies then try individuals who break these laws in their own in-house tribunals, without juries and without participation from the judicial branch.
This is a grave violation of due process and the rule of law. The ghosts of tyrant kings past threaten the spirit of due process and limited governance Magna Carta sought to protect.
Adding further to the degradation of the rule of law, during the COVID-19 pandemic, executive leaders used emergency powers to place unconstitutional restrictions on individuals that lasted far longer than the emergency itself. More recently, the executive branch has instituted new tariffs, a job that is delegated to Congress and Congress alone.
As for property rights, governments today still attempt to take property from individuals without giving them just compensation—another unfortunate remnant of the King John days.
The barons of 1215 may no longer be with us, but Pacific Legal Foundation is continuing to keep freedom alive by holding government accountable when it oversteps its bounds and rules without limitations.
A lot has changed in 810 years, but the precepts of individual liberty are evergreen. Physically, the four remaining copies of Magna Carta reside in various museums, but the document represents an idea so powerful its influence cannot be confined to glass display cases.
Protecting Magna Carta’s legacy today may not require swords or muskets, but it does require resilience and a willingness of individuals, like PLF’s clients, to stand up when governments ignore the rule of law.
