Concepts of Equality and Liberty in U.S. Founding Documents Traced in New Column

Why it matters locally: Vermont is specifically mentioned as one of the early states that adopted foundational language regarding equality and freedom, drawing from the Pennsylvania Constitution in its own state documents.

---

A new SCOTUSblog column titled "Born Free and Equal" explores the historical roots and development of the concept of inherent human rights in American legal tradition. The column's author, Professor Steven Calabresi, attributes the title to a phrase from the Declaration of Independence, which declares "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Calabresi notes that the year marks the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. He highlights that the idea of equality and freedom at birth appears in numerous early American foundational documents. For example, the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, partially drafted by John Adams, states in Article 1 that "All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights." Similarly, the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776's Article I asserts, "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights." Six of the 14 states in 1791, the year of the federal Bill of Rights' ratification, included similar language in their declarations of rights. New York State adopted language directly from the Declaration of Independence, while New Hampshire and Vermont used phrasing from the Pennsylvania Constitution. Even Virginia's 1776 constitution, from a slave state, contained a section declaring, "That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights." However, this was qualified with the clause "when they enter into a state of society," which the column states was inserted to protect slavery. In 1823, the case of *Corfield v. Coryell* included dicta that referenced fundamental privileges and immunities of citizens. Justice Bushrod Washington’s opinion in this case cited concepts like "protection by the government; the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety." This language, the column suggests, represents a modified version of the founding-era clauses. The "born free and equal" principle reappeared in the 1848 Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments. This document adapted the Declaration of Independence's language to advocate for sex equality, stating, "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men and women are created equal." President Abraham Lincoln also invoked this principle in his Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863. He characterized the nation as "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal," applying the principle to Black Americans. The column addresses a period between 1881 and the Holocaust when Social Darwinism and eugenics gained traction, challenging the "born free and equal" concept. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, along with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, are cited as figures who embraced these ideas. Holmes authored the majority opinion in the 1927 case *Buck v. Bell*, which upheld compulsory sterilization, a decision the column mentions was later distinguished but not overturned by *Skinner v. Oklahoma* in 1942. Following World War II and the Holocaust, President Harry Truman's administration re-emphasized the principle. Eleanor Roosevelt, as ambassador to the United Nations, contributed to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. further echoed this American creed in his 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech, proclaiming, "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'" Calabresi concludes that the American national creed, "All human beings are born free and equal," is deeply rooted in American history and tradition. He states that this principle will serve as the starting point for his SCOTUSblog column. He also states that the "born free and equal" language of the Declaration of Independence supports democratic governance "by the consent of the governed" and constrains judges from creating new rights not "deeply rooted in American history and tradition." He expresses disagreement with cases such as *Lochner v. New York* and *Roe v. Wade*, and agreement with Justice Stephen Field’s dissent in *The Slaughter-House Cases* and the outcome of *Corfield v. Coryell*. Calabresi states that the "born free and equal" creed influences constitutional law, with limitations that include the requirement that rights be deeply rooted in American history and tradition, and that rights are "subject nevertheless to such restraints as the government may justly prescribe for the general good of the whole."