Policy Memo
Reflection Paper
PLCY 703
La-Kee M. Smith
Helms School of Government, Liberty University
Reflection Paper
Introduction
This course has significantly shaped my understanding of constitutional order,
contemporary policy challenges, and the responsibilities of statesmanship. When I entered PLCY
703, I approached the Constitution primarily through the lens of original intent as a legal theory.
Over the weeks, however, I have found that original intent is a method of interpretation and a
Policy Memo
moral framework intended to preserve liberty, limit government overreach, and honor human
dignity as image-bearers of God (Brauch, 2017). The readings and discussions helped me to
understand constitutional drift and how it occurs when any government actor steps outside
their intended roles to influence an area beyond their constitutional limits. More importantly, I
understand how my chosen policy discussions, redistricting and higher education, are part of
broader contemporary challenges to constitutional order, such as judicial activism, government
overreach, punitive federalism, and the growth of the administrative state.
Reflecting on these lessons has deepened my commitment to examining public policy, in
real time, as a legal question and as a moral and constitutional one. I am more interested in
policy and more understanding of it because of this course. I look forward to my continued
educational journey in policy as well as it being a part of my everyday life.
Seven Connections to Contemporary Challenges
Redistricting as Constitutional Drift
One of the clearest connections I made in this course was through my analytic paper on
redistricting, which illustrated how constitutional order drifts when the Founders’ census-based
system becomes a partisan weapon. The Framers envisioned representation as stable,
populationbased, and tied to the decennial census (U.S. Constitution, n.d.). Yet, modern
practices such as mid-decade redistricting, has abandoned this stability in favor of partisan
advantage (Kaslovsky et al., 2025). I now understand how Supreme Court silence, as seen in
Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), amplified the problem by removing federal oversight from one
of the most pressing constitutional issues of fairness in representation. This reinforced my
conviction that silence by leaders is not neutral but it allows injustice to flourish. The biblical
parallel of Pilate washing his hands and refusing to act, found in Matthew 27:24 of The Holy
Bible, English Standard Version (2021), demonstrates that failure to intervene when a person in
a position of power enables oppression. Redistricting, for me, became a case of constitutional
drift that combines legal, moral, and spiritual deep dives about justice and responsibility.
Policy Memo
Punitive Federalism in Higher Education
In my Original Intent paper, I focused on the growing use of executive conditional
funding in higher education and discovered how it represents a shift from cooperative
federalism to punitive federalism. Federal aid, which was once intended to support institutions,
is now tied to ideological compliance on issues concerning speech, Title IX, and diversity
mandates. Before I studied this topic, I thought that grants were supportive mechanisms to
endorse and enhance research, but with this newfound understanding, I see them as double-
edged swords. They do provide funding and further research efforts but at a cost to the school
which may have to give up its institutional autonomy. McIlroy (2003) introduced me to the
biblical and political principle of subsidiarity, which insists that authority should remain at the
level closest to the people when competent to act. Also illustrated in Exodus 18 when Moses
delegated authority to local leaders, this principle reinforced my belief that higher education
policy should remain primarily in the states’ scope. The abandonment of subsidiarity in this area
reveals a dangerous constitutional drift and demands for leaders to resist punitive funding
practices, nationwide.
Government Overreach vs. Responsible Government
From the discussion on the Progressive Era, I learned the importance of understanding
government overreach and responsible government and the fine line that may be drawn
between them. Reforms like the Sherman Antitrust Act were demonstrations of responsible
government as they protect citizens from corporate monopolies, while the Seventeenth
Amendment represented overreach by undermining state sovereignty and altering the federal
balance (Higgs, 2012). I understand from these governmental acts that government growth can
safeguard liberty as well as threaten it, depending on how it is used. Higgs’ concept of the
“ratchet effect” provided clarity on the effect of expansions of government in times of crisis and
how they rarely go back to normal. This leaves a permanent larger scope of authority that may
Policy Memo
go unchecked, which undermines the structure of federalism and erodes public trust (Higgs,
2012).
Throughout the Bible are examples of arrogance and abuses of power in expanded
government. Proverbs 11:14 reminds us that in the multitude of counsel, there is safety. The
people are to be the voices that government listens to but the erosion of proper federalism is
revealing how centralized power ignores counsel and silences dissent while ignoring Jesus’
example of servant-leadership (John 13:14-17).
Judicial Activism
Another topic that I enjoyed studying was judicial activism. I had never heard the term
and was able to develop my perspective with understanding. I learned that judicial activism can
be harmful or helpful. Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) was an example of harmful activism, where
the Supreme Court ruled that enslaved people were not American citizens and, therefore, could
not utilize the courts to challenge injustices (Meyer, 2023). However, Brown v. Board of
Education (1954), which dismantled segregation, is an example of helpful activism in the court
system as it also marked the first Equal Protection Clause victory in 75 years (Yell, 2022).
From this assignment, I gained a more nuanced understanding that activism must be
judged by how it aligns with constitutional principles and justice. Isaiah 1:17 calls us to “seek
justice, correct oppression.” This is a reminder that courts my need to step outside their
restraint to defend liberty. Judicial activism, when used to correct systemic injustice, can
reinforce constitutional morality and serve as an example of leaders using their authority for
good rather than silence or oppression.
Civil Rights Expansion Post-WWII
I learned about how World War II transformed the United States profoundly, especially
through the civil rights movement. As a veteran, it resonated quite deeply with me that African
American veterans fought for freedom abroad only to come home and be burdened with
systemic segregation. This was an experience that fueled the legal challenges and grassroots
Policy Memo
movements that resulted in cases, such as Brown v. Board (Carle, 2023). Women had entered
the workforce and began to press for equality and permanent inclusion in civic life. These
movements revealed the persistence of inequalities even after the Reconstruction Amendments
and how federal intervention was still necessary to secure equal rights (Carle, 2023). I learned
that social change often arises from crisis but it must be anchored in principles of justice that
endure. Galatians 3:28 declares that we are all one in Christ reminding me that equality is not
just a civil right but a spiritual truth that affirms our God-given human dignity.
Growth of the Administrative State
In this discussion, I found that I had no real understanding of World War II in its entirety.
I learned that I am for some level of bureaucracy to provide guardrails that help secure the
rights of the citizens but it may be difficult to notice the vastness of the administrative state
until there is a crisis. World War II was the catalyst for what some considered to be an
overgrowth of the administrative state. Bureaucratic systems, created during wartime planning
persisted even during the subsequent peacetime, which changed the interaction between the
government and citizens. The G.I. Bill is a lasting representation of responsible government
through its provision of support and stability to veterans and families. However, Higgs (2012)
explains that governmental powers expanded during crises—particularly wartime—rarely
retreat after the crisis ends. Instead, they leave behind a permanent infrastructure of
bureaucratic authority that often exceeds constitutional limits.
This insight reshaped my own perspective: I had not fully appreciated the extent to
which unelected administrators, rather than elected officials, shape much of the policy that
governs daily life. The rise of this administrative state is a key reason executive power now
operates with minimal checks. Executive orders can be implemented in real time, while the
bureaucratic channels designed to review or restrain such actions move too slowly to provide
meaningful oversight. By the time procedural checks take effect, the executive’s policies have
already reshaped practice on the ground. As Higgs warns, this “ratchet effect” normalizes
Policy Memo
extraordinary power until it becomes ordinary, leaving the American people with diminished
accountability and a weakened constitutional order (Higgs, 2012).
Biblical Servant Leadership vs. Domination
My studies in this course have reinforced that law and policy are never neutral—they
either serve justice or undermine it. In reflecting on these lessons, I have come to see that every
debate over constitutional order is truly a debate over whether power will be exercised as
service or as domination. The Framers’ design sought to restrain the inevitable temptations of
human pride, grounding authority in federalism, accountability, and the consent of the
governed. This anchored my viewpoint that constitutional drift is about legal boundaries as
much as it is about moral responsibility. The Bible supports this wisdom in saying “Learn to do
good; seek justice, correct oppression” (Isaiah 1:17, ESV). When leaders serve by protecting
liberty, ensuring accountability, and respecting subsidiarity, they contribute to the restoration of
constitutional order and honor human dignity. When government expands beyond its limits,
eroding trust and silencing voices, it reflects arrogance and drift. My studies in this course have
reinforced that law and policy are never neutral—they either serve justice or undermine it.
As I continue my education in public policy, I have a renewed conviction that scholarship,
leadership, and faith together require me to defend constitutional order as a legal framework
and a moral responsibility to God and His people.
Policy Memo
References
Brauch, J. A. (2017). Flawed perfection: What it means to be human & why it matters for
culture, politics, and law. Lexham Press.
Carle, S. (2023). Reconstruction's lessons. Columbia Journal of Race and Law, 13(1), 734-789.
https://doi.org/10.52214/cjrl.v13i1.11662
Crossway Bibles. (2021). ESV student study bible: English standard version (ESV text ed.).
Crossway Bibles.
Frohnen, B., & Carey, G. W. (2016). Constitutional morality and the rise of quasi-law. Harvard
University Press.
Hamburger, P. (2014). Is Administrative Law Unlawful? University of Chicago Press.
Higgs, R. (2012). Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American
Government. Independent Institute.
Kaslovsky, J., Kistner, M. R., & Kistner, M. R. (2025). Responsive rhetoric: Evidence from
congressional redistricting. Legislative Studies Quarterly., 50(3).
https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12473
Meyer, W. B. (2023). The best answer? Justice Nelson’s concurrence in Dred Scott v. Sandford.
The American Journal of Legal History, 63(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajlh/njad010
Strang, L. J. (2019). Originalism’s Promise: A Natural Law Account of the American
Constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
U.S. Constitution | Constitution Annotated. (n.d.). Congress.gov | Library of Congress.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
