Matt Grocott

A little over a month ago, one of the Daily Journal readers wrote a letter to the paper and, in his final sentence, challenged me to read the U.S. Constitution. In a subsequent column, I offered for him to write again and point out the article or section he wished for me to review. I wasn’t sure if he thought I should read the whole Constitution or if he had a particular part in mind. He never responded. Maybe he doesn’t read the Journal as often as I thought or he had no particular point to make.

Jon Levinson is not the only reader to challenge what my knowledge of the Constitution is. In fact, there was another person who wrote a few weeks ago to question if I really had three copies and whether I’d ever gone to them for reference. I find these challenges strangely humorous because I deeply respect our Constitution. It is, after all, the contract between us and our government.

Recommended for you

Recommended for you

(9) comments

Newell Post

Reading the US constitution is fairly easy, except for some bits of 18th century language that aren't commonly understood today. Try reading the California constitution some time. It's over 40,000 words long, about the same length as many novellas. Every public official in California swears an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of California. But I have yet to talk to one who has actually read it and understands it, in full. One of the wise things the framers did is to make it possible but very difficult to amend the US constitution.

Matt Grocott

You make a very lucid point Newell. And it seems you were alluding to the fact also that the California state constitution is too easily amended and has been, giving rise to its length and complexity. Thank you for adding to the discussion.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Mr. Grocott,

A thoughtful piece, written about thoughtful men. Well done!

I add my thanks to Mr. Holman whose social studies class was the only I would not cut.

Rel

Mr. Grocott's treatise on the Constitution was well presented until he could not resist taking a political swipe against Biden without counterbalancing it with Trump. Mr. Grocott's love of the Constitution has yet evoked any consternation about the events on 1/6 and Trump's role in it. Until then, his words remain hollow.

Ray Fowler

Maybe the First Amendment gives Matt the choice to take a swipe at one elected official but refrain from commenting on someone else? Just saying...

DavidKristofferson

Well put, Rei. What is Mr. Grocutt’s response to the events of January 6th as well as Trump’s phone call to Georgia’s election officials? The silence on this point is deafening and makes his support of the Constitution insincere. I agree with him that the creation of our country and our form of government was an extremely significant event in human history, but reverence for the Constitution is clearly in conflict with supporting the behavior of our past president.

DavidKristofferson

And I should add to my previous comment that, since the Daily Journal has given Mr. Grocutt the megaphone of writing a column, his reply should come in a full-fledged opinion piece condemning The attempted subversion of the Constitution, not simply in a response here that only a small number of people will see.

Tafhdyd

Mr. Grocott,

Do you really believe that the purpose of increasing the citizenship test questions from 10 to 20 was to make new citizens better informed our country? Anyone who has followed the actions of Trump before and during his presidency can see that the sole purpose is to further restrict the ability of non English speaking immigrants to become citizens. Sources say that some of the questions had wording changed to phrases not easily translated to other languages with the purpose of confusing the test taker. It might be important to recognize that even under the ten question test studies have shown that about 30% of home grown and english speaking Americans can’t pass the test. Maybe we should educate our own before impeding others.

Dirk van Ulden

Taffy - as a poll worker for many years I found it insulting that many voters could not even understand or read basic English. How they passed the citizenship exam is a mystery to me. You would never be able to pull that off in any other country, including Mexico or the Netherlands. We are way to accommodating and don't think that our language is the key to assimilation. Perhaps that is by design? If one is not fluent in a country's language one is likely destined to remain a member of the underclass, an objective that the Democratic Party appears to encourage. That is where many of their voters are.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!

Want to join the discussion?

Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.

Already a subscriber? Login Here