Jeff Sessions and the Death of Compassionate Conservatism

Last updated on: September 24, 2018 at 5:00 am by Libby Anne

Jeff Sessions and the Death of Compassionate Conservatism 2018-09-19T17:45:29-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In a recent speech before immigration judges, Attorney General Jeff Sessions urged his listeners to shed their sense of compassion:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday warned incoming immigration judges that lawyers representing immigrants are trying to get around the law like “water seeping through an earthen dam” and that their responsibility is to not let them and instead deliver a “secure” border and a “lawful system” that “actually works.”

He also cautioned the judges against allowing sympathy for the people appearing before them, which might cause them to make decisions contrary to what the law requires.

“When we depart from the law and create nebulous legal standards out of a sense of sympathy for the personal circumstances of a respondent in our immigration courts, we do violence to the rule of law and constitutional fabric that bind this great nation. Your job is to apply the law — even in tough cases,” he said.

Immigration rights activists—including a number of immigration judges—quickly took umbrage at Sessions’ comments:

Jeffrey Chase, a former immigration judge and now an immigration attorney, said the comments overlooked the fact that asylum laws were designed to be flexible.

“We possess brains and hearts, not just one or the other,” he said. It is sympathy, Chase said, that often spurs legal theories that advance the law in asylum law, civil rights, and criminal law.

“Sessions is characterizing decisions he personally disagrees with as being based on sympathy alone,” he said, “when in fact, those decisions were driven by sympathy but based on solid legal reasoning.”

Sessions may believe that his interpretation of the law is the correct one and that other interpretations are based on “sympathy” and a failure to take the law seriously, but that does not make him right.

Sessions’ insistence that his interpretation of the law is logical while others’ interpretations are polluted by emotions is no more reality than is the stereotype that men are “logical” and women are “emotional.” The reality is that we all have access to both, and that no one makes a decision based solely on one or the other. Law, after all, is often complicated, with room for multiple different interpretations and applications. If it were not, we would not need judges to begin with.

This portrayal also ignores Sessions’ role in setting policy—he’s no cog who simply carries out what is handed to him, he also makes decisions and rulings and sets policy. Early this summer, for example, he chanced asylum policy as follows:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday made it all but impossible for asylum seekers to gain entry into the United States by citing fears of domestic abuse or gang violence, in a ruling that could have a broad effect on the flow of migrants from Central America.

Mr. Sessions’s decision in a closely watched domestic violence case is the latest turn in a long-running debate over what constitutes a need for asylum. He reversed an immigration appeals court ruling that granted it to a Salvadoran woman who said she had been sexually, emotionally and physically abused by her husband.

…

Mr. Sessions’s decision overturns a precedent set during the Obama administration that allowed more women to claim credible fears of domestic abuse and will make it harder for such arguments to prevail in immigration courts. He said the Obama administration created “powerful incentives” for people to “come here illegally and claim a fear of return.”

The trouble, of course, is that individuals granted asylum are here legally—and that seeking asylum is legal. Sessions’ new policy does not cut down on “illegal” immigration. Instead, it renders illegal immigration that was previously legal.

This is not a case of Sessions waving his hands and saying “we don’t make the law and can’t change it,” in other words. As Attorney General, Sessions does set and affect and make policy. And he’s going with a blanket rejection of compassion.

Do you remember the “compassionate conservatism” Bush preached in 2000? I do. I was only a teen at a time, but the idea made an impression even then. And certainly, we can argue that gutting welfare isn’t compassionate, that growing the carceral state isn’t compassionate, and so on. I never said the idea was based in reality. But there was nonetheless this idea that conservative policies could be—and should be—compassionate. I’m wondering, now, whether that idea might be going out of vogue.

Have we seen the end of “compassionate conservatism”—the death knell for the idea that conservatives should show sympathy for their fellow human beings? From where I’m standing, the answer seems to be yes. Conservatives have moved beyond supporting policy positions that lack compassion—say, opposing Obamacare, or fighting same-sex marriage. Instead, leading conservatives are actively condemning even the idea of showing sympathy or compassion.

Compassion—and sympathy—have become bad words among conservatives. The idea that conservatism can or should be compassionate has fallen by the wayside.

I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!

Politics

compassionate conservatism

Previous Post

September 23, 2018

Lesbian Duplex 190: An Open Thread

Next Post

September 25, 2018 The Paternalism of Complementarian Anti-Abuse Activism

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the effect of the Red Horse's arrival in revelations?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Plagues spread across the land Peace is taken from the earth People fall into a deep sleep The sun turns black