Dustin Hilliard

I hold the government of the United States of America in contempt, in

contempt of its people, its duties, and its obligations! We have a government out of
order. It is a broken instrument of the people long since lost from our hands, taken
by the greedy grasping palms of the few. It has become a disaster behind a faceless
faade. It stands unaware of its hypocrisy. In all the small ways we can, we must
began to move against this grotesque monstrosity with the avenues that yet remain
open to us.
I propose an action of chipping away at its edifice, and untwisting the tangled
mess that lies inside. As I put more words to paper, as it were, I hope to facilitate
the growth of such ideas in the hearts and minds of others, as my vision becomes
clearer as well. This aforementioned action, is the best to take when one lacks a
central strategy, which so far I do. Today, I begin with a relatively minor, but still
quite important injustice that is presently perpetuated on the people of this great
nation.
Somewhere, a man is being arrested for the consumption of alcohol by a
minor. The awkward paradox: this hypothetical man is considered an enfranchised
adult by the very government that is currently placing him in custody for not
being adult enough. The law being enforced is that which targets legal adults for
partaking in an activity allowed to the greatest portion of other enfranchised adults,
or anyone over the age of 21. This law, is not only against the spirit of equality
fostered in this nation, but it is also against the very spirit of the constitution itself.
Finally, its arbitrary nature is highlighted by a fact understandable to all, maturity is
not determined by age.
The drinking age law is the question under consideration here. This state law
came into being when the federal government, essentially, decided it must. Not
only was the states authority encroached upon in this incident, but the federal
government coerced this action in full knowledge that it was doing a wrong, which
cannot be justified under the scrutiny of constitutionalism. So how do they justify
this unjustifiable wrong? First, a little background must be given to show the
thought process of these misguided lawmakers.
In the early seventies, the draft was in full force. Eighteen year olds were
plucked freshly out of high school to go fight and die in a swamp on the other side
of the planet, and for a cause they didnt fully understand. It was realized that such
sacrifice by unfranchised persons was unacceptable, so instead of pulling children
out of Vietnam, these children were deemed adults by virtue of the 26 th
amendment, and adults they have stayed. In that war and ever since, the young
have proven that mere age does not make a man, and they are every bit deserving
of rights and privileges as all those people above the age of 21.
Afterwards, the logical step was to lower the barriers of previous laws which
were created to avoid the procurement of certain goods and services to children.
States began to lower the drinking age to the age of 18, the age of legal adulthood.

This step was only right and proper. What followed may appear justifiable, but in the
course of my paper I will prove exactly why it was not.
As a counter to the rising fatal DUIs of new drinkers, the federal government
passed The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. This, effectively, required
that states raise their legal drinking age to 21. For certain, the level of fatal DUIs
did fall between the ages of 18 and 21. However, if the law was passed to include
22 year olds, it would certainly reduce the level of fatal DUIs caused by people in
that age group as well. It would be interesting to take a look at the number of fatal
DUIs committed by new drinkers in the age group of 21-24 after the law was
passed. Such research would prove pivotal in proving that maturity and
responsibility are improved, or perhaps not, by age.
First, the law itself violated the 10th amendment in the Bill of Rights, which
states that any power not delegated to the federal government falls to the
individual states and the people. Essentially, the law punishes those states which
would not conform, which is where the violation lays.
As the 10th amendment protects the rights of each individual state, would
that not logically extend to being protected from the federal government for a state
having justly used its power? Instead we have a rewards and punishments system in
place for the proper use of state power as determined by men in federal office.
This system is reminiscent of our judicial system, which partially by virtue of the
presently discussed law, has recently created more criminals than it has deterred.
How impressive!
The second violation, and the most damning one of all, lies hidden within the
equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment.
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein
they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (Constitution of the
United States, XIV Amendment, Section 1).
Specifically, this amendment states that every person is entitled to equal
protection from the law. Let us assume that this, and the entirety of the constitution
apply specifically to adults, with children being left as a special case. That would still
entitle enfranchised adults to the same exact protection under the law. ALL
enfranchised adults i.e. 18 year olds. It is not even the slightest jump that this
clause must be made to apply in situations of protection under the law AS WELL AS
protection from the law.
Of course, this law was passed when 21 was considered the age of adulthood.
However, a later amendment, the 26th, enfranchised (gave the right to vote) to
people on and above the age of 18. That is down from 21. The logic of this was
explained. The combination of these amendments should have been enough to
unilaterally lower the drinking age.

The fact that the equal protection clause has been left out of any proceedings
in court is a gross misstep. Many people may say that it was never meant to mean
equal protection from the law, those many people would be wrong. To correct them,
I direct them to American history in general, which is rife with a sentiment of
mistrust towards government by American citizens. The American Revolution grew
from that sentiment, as too did the civil war. The American right still holds such
sentiments, while the left campaigns consistently for a more equal system. Every
single American, who is beholden both to a belief in the constitution as well as to
the rights of American citizens must support the thwarting of such a hypocritical
law.
The rule of a government is to seal the rifts of the citizenry, not create a new
ones. This, unfortunately, misguided law creates a rift. The rift divides people who
have been deemed, arbitrarily, to deserve less rights from those who somehow
deserve more. Officials also decry the increase in crime, when such a system only
lives to criminalize further. Many a young persons first offenses lie well within the
realm of supposed underage drinking. This is an arbitrary line to have drawn. 21.
As stated above, 36 months does not make a man, or a woman.
I contend, that those masses of detained and arrested individuals are not in
violation of anything but an unjust law, instead the government is in violation of us.
We are enfranchised American adults. The government is only ever reminded of this
when they wish to tax us, use us, and fine us. This is a disgusting hypocrisy set
upon and perpetuated over the American people by a group of mistaken individuals
with a misguided claim to superior morality. They wish us to submit to their
authority, while forgetting the source of theirs. We must remind them ourselves that
the government of the United States of America and its individual states are
beholden to the people!