Video
Written Component
The historical forces giving rise to this excerpt of text likely are the framers of the Constitution’s consideration of different political ideas. Looking back, especially on the Revolutionary War, the Americans remembered what tyranny could be like, and they wanted to be sure that the accusation of treason wasn’t simply something used to silence people with plans that could help America develop into a more experienced and peaceful nation.
The commonly understood meaning of Article III, section III beyond the obvious ‘don’t commit treason’ is that the United States discourages treason charges being thrown around, so an accuser needs two witnesses with testimonials or a full confession. Also, Congress is essentially in charge of deciding punishments for treason. However, the punishment should not extend beyond the accused to their family, or last longer than the accused lives.
This particular provision has been interpreted in separate ways involving, firstly, the modern impact of treason. There have been barely any people accused of treason for a long time because of the specifications in the Constitution and the qualifications of the legitimate charge of treason. However, sometimes people are convicted of similar crimes, such as espionage, and still handled like a treason case, even going as far as to call the accused a traitor.
This is important especially considering the way the treason clause was written to add some protection, and so going away from the formal accusation of treason removes any of the padding that was originally included in the Constitution. A supreme court case at the center of this small dispute is Rosenberg v. United States, which involves Julius and Ethel Rosenberg being accused of espionage and not treason. However, even though the charge was espionage, the judge and prosecutors essentially combined the charges, informally suggesting that the Rosenbergs had committed treason.
The Rosenbergs’ case became known when they began to insist that this was a violation of the Constitution because they were essentially facing the consequences of treason without any of the specifications of the Constitution. This is illustrative of the debate of the legitimacy of treason as a charge and surrounding rules because it brings up why the framers of the Constitution may have included every word they chose to write about the legal punishments for treason. This provision connects to other concepts discussed this year mainly in the Enlightenment with philosophers.
Mainly, the center of this section is John Locke in his ideas of a person’s natural rights to life, liberty, and property. This section gets into exactly what the punishment should be, and who should decide, ensuring that no one’s right to liberty or property is denied beyond a reasonable point, so that the punishment is fair and fit to the crime itself. I find the treason clause to still be very relevant and its mention of heredity and forfeiture is very persuasive and important.