By Paul Beston on 3.11.05 @ 12:08AM
Second chances are not a constitutional right, contrary to what many Americans seem to believe.
Several years back I was riding in a cab and talking about the
troubles of New York Knicks' broadcaster Marv Albert, who had been
fired after being charged with sexual assault. The cabbie, a
passionate Knicks fan and Albert supporter, protested when I said
that NBC, Albert's employer, had no choice but to fire him.
"What about his right to a second chance?" the cabbie asked,
indignant. "I thought everybody in this country gets a second
chance." As if to prove him right, Albert got his job back less
than a year later.
I remembered that conversation this past weekend, as I watched
news reports of Martha Stewart's release from prison and listened
to one commentator after another intoning some variation of the
idea that everyone deserves a second chance in America. "We're a
nation of second chances!" one of them gushed.
I'd be interested to see a poll of how many Americans believe
that a second chance is guaranteed by the Constitution, and I'm
surprised, given decades of judicial activism, that such a right
has not yet been found by one of our Supreme Court justices,
perhaps Anthony Kennedy. He's already decreed that "the heart of
liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of
meaning, of the universe," so enshrining second chances in some
similar fashion wouldn't be much of a leap.
Somewhere along the way, the idea changed from America itself as
the second chance -- a place to come to and start over -- to life
in America being a nearly limitless series of second chances.
That's a big difference, like trading in Home of the Brave for Home
of the Mulligan.
Don't get me wrong. I believe in second chances as much as I
believe that punishments should fit the crimes. Now that Martha
Stewart has served her sentence, she is free to pursue her business
again. Whether she is successful or not will be determined by
changes in the market, increased competition, shifting public
taste, and other factors. She won't fail, however, because of any
stain from her past indiscretions. That would be a violation of her
quasi-mystical right to a second chance.
In an earlier time, she still would have gotten a second chance,
but in addition to the business challenge she would also have faced
the challenge of surmounting a stigma as an ex-con. She would be
trying to sell goods to people who had no particular belief that
she had a "right" to a second chance. On the contrary, they would
probably consider her very lucky to be getting one.
You don't hear the word luck too often when someone like Martha
Stewart emerges from her travails and bounces effortlessly into a
new TV hosting gig. You don't hear sorry, either. You don't hear
them say, My, what a country, that I could be found guilty of what
I did and be welcomed back. You don't hear them say how sobering it
is to realize that one mistake in Iraq means the end of all second
chances for our troops over there, but over here, a mistake a day
is good for the soul so long as one never admits the mistake.
Some chalk up such arrogance to the prerogatives of a rich and
powerful woman, but I can't help but think that Martha's posture is
not too far from our own, an indication of how deeply we have all
absorbed this new understanding of second chances -- not the measly
second chance to be able to walk the streets again, but a grand
second chance to be restored exactly to what we were before. The
second chance not so much as a way to overcome the past as to
obliterate it.
Wasn't that what the American Revolution was about? I'll bet if
you asked Martha Stewart that, and phrased the question just a bit
more subtly, she'd say yes.
What our contemporary notion of second chances lacks is the
concept of reciprocity, that the offender do something to earn his
second chance, or at least atone for his mistakes. Lost, too, is
the understanding that the second chance is granted by others, not
inalienable, not bequeathed by the creator.
But those ideas are out of fashion, if not offensive, almost as
offensive as the idea that we are the sum of our deeds.
topics:
Business, Constitution, Supreme Court, Iraq