WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.120 Hello, and welcome to our deep dive. So if you 00:00:04.120 --> 00:00:06.759 are walking, or maybe driving, or just sitting 00:00:06.759 --> 00:00:09.439 at your desk right now, I want you to do something. 00:00:09.980 --> 00:00:12.060 Reach into your pocket or your wallet. Assuming 00:00:12.060 --> 00:00:13.779 you actually still carry physical cash, right? 00:00:13.779 --> 00:00:16.320 Right, yeah. But if you do, just pull out a coin. 00:00:16.699 --> 00:00:18.320 Honestly, it doesn't matter if it's a penny, 00:00:18.640 --> 00:00:22.000 a quarter, or if you prefer paper money, grab 00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:25.339 a $1 bill. Just pull it out and look really closely 00:00:25.339 --> 00:00:28.679 at it. Because amidst all the intricate engraving 00:00:28.679 --> 00:00:31.100 and the portraits of past presidents and all 00:00:31.100 --> 00:00:34.299 those complex security features, there are four 00:00:34.299 --> 00:00:37.060 ubiquitous words stamped right there in capital 00:00:37.060 --> 00:00:40.100 letters. In God we trust. Exactly. In God we 00:00:40.100 --> 00:00:42.960 trust. It is so familiar that our eyes literally 00:00:42.960 --> 00:00:44.759 just glide right over it. We don't even process 00:00:44.759 --> 00:00:46.969 it anymore. We really don't. But have you ever 00:00:46.969 --> 00:00:49.329 actually stopped to ask yourself how those four 00:00:49.329 --> 00:00:51.390 words got there? Like what does the physical 00:00:51.390 --> 00:00:54.030 currency in your hands actually say about American 00:00:54.030 --> 00:00:56.310 currency history? It says a lot more than people 00:00:56.310 --> 00:00:59.740 think. It really does. So today. Our mission 00:00:59.740 --> 00:01:02.479 is to explore the massive, winding, and I mean, 00:01:02.619 --> 00:01:05.060 let's be honest, heavily debated Wikipedia file 00:01:05.060 --> 00:01:08.079 on In God We Trust. We are going to unpack the 00:01:08.079 --> 00:01:11.480 origins, the controversies, and the immense cultural 00:01:11.480 --> 00:01:14.700 impact of the United States national motto. And 00:01:14.700 --> 00:01:16.459 before we get into it, we need to set some ground 00:01:16.459 --> 00:01:19.489 rules. because this topic touches the absolute 00:01:19.489 --> 00:01:21.670 third rail of American politics and religion. 00:01:22.250 --> 00:01:24.290 I mean, we are dealing directly with the separation 00:01:24.290 --> 00:01:27.469 of church and state, left -wing secularism, right 00:01:27.469 --> 00:01:30.129 -wing conservatism. It's a lot. It is a minefield. 00:01:30.329 --> 00:01:32.769 Yeah. So our mission today is absolutely not 00:01:32.769 --> 00:01:35.329 to take sides or spin the narrative. We are looking 00:01:35.329 --> 00:01:37.810 strictly at the historical and legal record. 00:01:38.030 --> 00:01:40.170 How did we get here? Yeah, I think it's important 00:01:40.170 --> 00:01:41.930 to state right up front to you, the listener, 00:01:42.209 --> 00:01:43.790 that the scope of the sources we're analyzing 00:01:43.790 --> 00:01:46.370 today is just incredibly broad. Oh, for sure. 00:01:46.439 --> 00:01:49.420 We are pulling from historical newspaper archives, 00:01:50.040 --> 00:01:52.459 centuries of legislative records, numismatics, 00:01:52.540 --> 00:01:55.599 which is the study of coins, and a very complex 00:01:55.599 --> 00:01:58.459 web of legal precedents. Our timeline today spans 00:01:58.459 --> 00:02:01.019 from the 18th century colonial era all the way 00:02:01.019 --> 00:02:03.500 to 21st century lawsuits over state license plates. 00:02:03.640 --> 00:02:07.180 Wow. So the objective is to impartially convey 00:02:07.180 --> 00:02:10.120 the historical and legal facts exactly as they're 00:02:10.120 --> 00:02:12.360 contained in the source material. We want to 00:02:12.360 --> 00:02:14.759 give you the unvarnished history and the legal 00:02:14.759 --> 00:02:17.020 context behind the money we use every single 00:02:17.020 --> 00:02:19.400 day. OK, let's unpack this, because when I first 00:02:19.400 --> 00:02:22.039 looked at the outline for this deep dive, I just 00:02:22.039 --> 00:02:24.500 sort of assumed this phrase was coined by the 00:02:24.500 --> 00:02:26.560 founding fathers. Yeah, most people do. Right. 00:02:26.680 --> 00:02:29.219 Like I figured it was drafted alongside the Constitution 00:02:29.219 --> 00:02:31.319 or maybe etched into the Liberty Bell or something. 00:02:31.900 --> 00:02:34.860 But the earliest recorded English usage of this 00:02:34.860 --> 00:02:38.060 exact motto actually predates the United States 00:02:38.060 --> 00:02:41.039 itself. It does. It takes us back to January 00:02:41.039 --> 00:02:44.550 1748. There was a report in the Pennsylvania 00:02:44.550 --> 00:02:47.250 Gazette about the flags of Benjamin Franklin's 00:02:47.250 --> 00:02:49.509 Pennsylvania militia. So I just have to ask, 00:02:49.629 --> 00:02:51.770 why did Benjamin Franklin have a militia in the 00:02:51.770 --> 00:02:54.150 first place? And why was this specific phrase 00:02:54.150 --> 00:02:57.469 on their flag? So to understand that 1748 appearance, 00:02:57.710 --> 00:03:00.009 we really have to look at the unique political 00:03:00.009 --> 00:03:02.610 climate of colonial Pennsylvania. OK. Unlike 00:03:02.610 --> 00:03:05.310 other colonies, Pennsylvania was founded by Quakers 00:03:05.310 --> 00:03:08.610 who were strictly pacifists. Oh, right. No fighting. 00:03:09.129 --> 00:03:11.699 Exactly. Because of their religious convictions, 00:03:12.340 --> 00:03:14.639 the colonial government officially refused to 00:03:14.639 --> 00:03:17.159 establish a state militia. And this was even 00:03:17.159 --> 00:03:19.419 when they were actively threatened by French 00:03:19.419 --> 00:03:21.719 and Spanish privateers during King George's War. 00:03:22.039 --> 00:03:23.740 So the government is basically saying we're not 00:03:23.740 --> 00:03:27.340 fighting no matter what. Pretty much. But Benjamin 00:03:27.340 --> 00:03:31.719 Franklin, who was incredibly pragmatic, he realized 00:03:31.719 --> 00:03:33.900 that they needed a defense force regardless of 00:03:33.900 --> 00:03:36.919 the government's pacifism. So he organized this 00:03:36.919 --> 00:03:40.039 massive volunteer militia and they called themselves 00:03:40.039 --> 00:03:42.580 the Associators. The Associators. Okay, so these 00:03:42.580 --> 00:03:46.180 Associators are essentially a privatized grassroots 00:03:46.180 --> 00:03:48.259 defense force stepping in because the official 00:03:48.259 --> 00:03:50.919 government just outright refuses to fight. Precisely. 00:03:51.020 --> 00:03:53.219 And because they were volunteers drawn from all 00:03:53.219 --> 00:03:55.520 these diverse trades and backgrounds, they needed 00:03:55.520 --> 00:03:58.620 unifying symbols. So Franklin designed several 00:03:58.620 --> 00:04:01.460 flags or colors for these regiments. And according 00:04:01.460 --> 00:04:03.699 to that report in the Pennsylvania Gazette, one 00:04:03.699 --> 00:04:06.259 of these flags featured a coronet, a plume of 00:04:06.259 --> 00:04:09.050 feathers, and the motto, In God We Trust. That 00:04:09.050 --> 00:04:12.169 is wild. But is there any record of where Franklin 00:04:12.169 --> 00:04:14.250 actually pulled the phrase from? Like, was it 00:04:14.250 --> 00:04:16.509 a common idiom at the time, or did he just invent 00:04:16.509 --> 00:04:18.970 it for the flag? Well, it wasn't invented out 00:04:18.970 --> 00:04:21.410 of whole cloth, but it also wasn't exactly a 00:04:21.410 --> 00:04:24.000 common secular idiom either. What's fascinating 00:04:24.000 --> 00:04:26.720 here is the literary and theological evolution 00:04:26.720 --> 00:04:29.540 of the phrase. OK. Historians actually trace 00:04:29.540 --> 00:04:32.500 the underlying sentiment to renderings of biblical 00:04:32.500 --> 00:04:36.800 texts, specifically Psalm 56 .1. But the exact 00:04:36.800 --> 00:04:39.800 phrase, in God we trust, emerges more distinctly 00:04:39.800 --> 00:04:42.680 in the context of Isaac Watts Salter. Isaac Watts. 00:04:42.819 --> 00:04:45.339 Who was he? Isaac Watts was an enormously popular 00:04:45.339 --> 00:04:47.769 English hymn writer. in the early 18th century. 00:04:48.290 --> 00:04:50.750 In his translation of Psalm 115, verses 9 through 00:04:50.750 --> 00:04:53.470 11, Watts originally wrote the words, Britain 00:04:53.470 --> 00:04:56.410 trust the Lord. Oh, wow. Britain trust the Lord. 00:04:56.470 --> 00:04:59.350 Yeah. And his hymns were widely sung across the 00:04:59.350 --> 00:05:01.790 colonies. So the cadence and the theological 00:05:01.790 --> 00:05:04.290 concept of national trust in the divine were 00:05:04.290 --> 00:05:06.470 already deeply ingrained in the colonial mindset. 00:05:06.709 --> 00:05:08.970 But wait, if Watts wrote Britain trust the Lord, 00:05:09.370 --> 00:05:12.189 how do we actually get to the Americanized in 00:05:12.189 --> 00:05:14.170 God we trust? Was there a specific moment when 00:05:14.170 --> 00:05:16.459 that text was altered? There was, and it happened 00:05:16.459 --> 00:05:19.560 in 1785, right after the United States won its 00:05:19.560 --> 00:05:21.699 independence. Oh, so they couldn't sing about 00:05:21.699 --> 00:05:24.139 Britain anymore. Exactly. An American publisher 00:05:24.139 --> 00:05:27.220 and poet named Joel Barlow recognized that the 00:05:27.220 --> 00:05:29.860 newly independent nation obviously could no longer 00:05:29.860 --> 00:05:33.689 sing hymns pledging trust to Britain. So Barlow 00:05:33.689 --> 00:05:36.930 decided he needed to revise Watt Salter for an 00:05:36.930 --> 00:05:39.170 American audience. Makes sense. His explicit 00:05:39.170 --> 00:05:41.689 goal, as noted in the historical sources, was 00:05:41.689 --> 00:05:44.709 to modify the hymns to purge them of their, and 00:05:44.709 --> 00:05:47.110 this is a quote, un -American flavor. Un -American 00:05:47.110 --> 00:05:50.230 flavor, wow. So he takes the line, Britain, trust 00:05:50.230 --> 00:05:53.459 the Lord. and translates it instead as, In God 00:05:53.459 --> 00:05:55.819 We Trust. So it was essentially an editorial 00:05:55.819 --> 00:05:58.019 rebranding exercise, like Barlow was trying to 00:05:58.019 --> 00:06:00.579 sever cultural ties with Britain and simultaneously 00:06:00.579 --> 00:06:03.060 establish this distinct American religious identity. 00:06:03.259 --> 00:06:05.560 It was exactly what it was. And once Barlow published 00:06:05.560 --> 00:06:08.180 that revision, the phrase really started to gain 00:06:08.180 --> 00:06:10.480 some real cultural traction. It caught on. It 00:06:10.480 --> 00:06:13.720 did. By the early 19th century, it begins appearing 00:06:13.720 --> 00:06:17.240 in highly significant national contexts. If we 00:06:17.240 --> 00:06:20.180 move forward to the War of 1812, specifically 00:06:20.180 --> 00:06:23.339 the bombardment of Fort McHenry in 1814, we see 00:06:23.339 --> 00:06:26.519 the phrase adapted into our most famous patriotic 00:06:26.519 --> 00:06:29.620 text. Right, Francis Scott Key. Yes. Francis 00:06:29.620 --> 00:06:31.699 Scott Key, who was a lawyer trapped on a British 00:06:31.699 --> 00:06:34.040 ship watching the bombardment, wrote the poem, 00:06:34.199 --> 00:06:36.399 Defense of Fort McHenry, which eventually became 00:06:36.399 --> 00:06:38.860 the Star -Spangled Banner. Yeah, and I think 00:06:38.860 --> 00:06:41.600 most people only really know the first verse 00:06:41.600 --> 00:06:43.540 of the National Anthem. But if you actually look 00:06:43.540 --> 00:06:45.839 at the fourth stanza of that poem, Key wrote 00:06:45.839 --> 00:06:48.680 the line, quote, And this be our motto, in God 00:06:48.680 --> 00:06:52.100 is our trust. Did Key just pull that from Barlow's 00:06:52.100 --> 00:06:54.519 hymnal or was it just a parallel evolution of 00:06:54.519 --> 00:06:57.740 the same biblical concept? It is difficult to 00:06:57.740 --> 00:07:00.220 definitively prove Key was directly quoting Barlow, 00:07:00.579 --> 00:07:03.139 but it clearly demonstrates how thoroughly the 00:07:03.139 --> 00:07:05.240 concept had permeated the American consciousness 00:07:05.240 --> 00:07:08.600 by that point. It fit the poetic meter, and it 00:07:08.600 --> 00:07:11.060 perfectly encapsulated the wartime reliance on 00:07:11.060 --> 00:07:13.180 divine providence. And the sources show us that 00:07:13.180 --> 00:07:16.100 this phrase had a remarkably broad cultural footprint 00:07:16.100 --> 00:07:18.899 long before the government ever mandated it on 00:07:18.899 --> 00:07:21.800 currency. For example, it became a rallying cry 00:07:21.800 --> 00:07:24.060 for the abolitionist movement. Really? Yeah. 00:07:24.420 --> 00:07:27.560 In 1845, a man named D .S. Whitney published 00:07:27.560 --> 00:07:30.420 an anti -slavery hymn in the famous abolitionist 00:07:30.420 --> 00:07:34.420 newspaper The Liberator. And that hymn utilized 00:07:34.420 --> 00:07:36.600 the motto. I see in the notes that it wasn't 00:07:36.600 --> 00:07:39.120 just abolitionists either. Fraternal organizations 00:07:39.120 --> 00:07:41.240 were using it too. Yes, the independent order 00:07:41.240 --> 00:07:44.000 of odd fellows used in God we trust. as their 00:07:44.000 --> 00:07:47.180 official motto from the 1840s well into the 1870s. 00:07:47.199 --> 00:07:49.199 It appeared on their seals, their literature, 00:07:49.360 --> 00:07:51.860 and their lodge banners. Just imagine being a 00:07:51.860 --> 00:07:56.040 citizen in the 1840s or 1850s. This phrase isn't 00:07:56.040 --> 00:07:58.540 something handed down by federal law or stamped 00:07:58.540 --> 00:08:01.519 by the U .S. Mint yet. It's totally a grassroots 00:08:01.519 --> 00:08:03.779 sentiment. It's sung by abolitionists fighting 00:08:03.779 --> 00:08:06.560 to end slavery. It's recited in fraternal lodges, 00:08:06.680 --> 00:08:09.240 and it's woven into patriotic poetry. It was 00:08:09.240 --> 00:08:11.360 everywhere in the culture. But how does a grassroots 00:08:11.360 --> 00:08:14.459 phrase jump from poetry and hymnals onto the 00:08:14.459 --> 00:08:16.819 physical money we use to buy groceries? From 00:08:16.819 --> 00:08:18.079 what I'm reading in the outline, we have to look 00:08:18.079 --> 00:08:21.860 at the Civil War for that shift. Yes. The 1860s 00:08:21.860 --> 00:08:24.480 seemed to be the crucible where this motto officially 00:08:24.480 --> 00:08:27.899 meets the medal. So what exactly was the catalyst? 00:08:28.199 --> 00:08:30.319 The defining catalyst came in the form of a letter 00:08:30.319 --> 00:08:34.100 dated November 13th, 1861. The nation was fracturing. 00:08:34.399 --> 00:08:36.840 The Civil War was obviously underway. And a man 00:08:36.840 --> 00:08:39.039 named Reverend Mark R. Watkinson, who was the 00:08:39.039 --> 00:08:41.820 pastor of a Baptist church in Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, 00:08:42.340 --> 00:08:44.480 petitioned the Treasury Department. OK, what 00:08:44.480 --> 00:08:48.180 did he want? Watkinson wanted a statement. recognizing 00:08:48.180 --> 00:08:52.519 Almighty God in some form on our coins. His stated 00:08:52.519 --> 00:08:54.700 reasoning in the letter was to, quote, relieve 00:08:54.700 --> 00:08:57.799 us from the ignominy of heathenism. The ignominy 00:08:57.799 --> 00:09:01.200 of heathenism. That is some incredibly intense 00:09:01.200 --> 00:09:04.039 fire and brimstone language to use in a bureaucratic 00:09:04.039 --> 00:09:05.960 petition to the Treasury Department. It really 00:09:05.960 --> 00:09:08.279 is. Was Watkinson implying that because the union 00:09:08.279 --> 00:09:10.220 didn't have God on its money, they were somehow 00:09:10.220 --> 00:09:13.809 fighting as heathens? Essentially, yes. To understand 00:09:13.809 --> 00:09:16.570 Watkinson's theological anxiety there, we have 00:09:16.570 --> 00:09:18.809 to look at the broader context of what historians 00:09:18.809 --> 00:09:21.629 call the Divine Arms Race between the North and 00:09:21.629 --> 00:09:23.830 the South during the Civil War. The Divine Arms 00:09:23.830 --> 00:09:26.769 Race. Right. Both the Union and the Confederacy 00:09:26.769 --> 00:09:28.929 were desperately attempting to claim that God 00:09:28.929 --> 00:09:32.110 was exclusively on their side. The stakes were 00:09:32.110 --> 00:09:35.350 existential. But the Union felt they were actively 00:09:35.350 --> 00:09:38.769 losing the Divine Public Relations War. Why did 00:09:38.769 --> 00:09:41.169 they feel that way? Because the Confederacy's 00:09:41.169 --> 00:09:44.330 Constitution Right, in its preamble, explicitly 00:09:44.330 --> 00:09:47.129 invoked the favor and guidance of Almighty God. 00:09:48.309 --> 00:09:51.570 The U .S. Constitution, famously, makes no such 00:09:51.570 --> 00:09:54.370 explicit invocation of the divine. Oh wow, I 00:09:54.370 --> 00:09:56.230 didn't realize that about the Confederate Constitution. 00:09:56.409 --> 00:09:59.279 Yeah, so because of this contrast... Union supporters 00:09:59.279 --> 00:10:02.019 like Watkinson felt a profound religious insecurity. 00:10:02.580 --> 00:10:05.039 They worried that without a public official acknowledgement 00:10:05.039 --> 00:10:07.799 of God, the Union might lose the moral high ground 00:10:07.799 --> 00:10:10.580 and perhaps even divine favor on the actual battlefield. 00:10:10.720 --> 00:10:12.700 So if the Union felt they were falling behind 00:10:12.700 --> 00:10:14.919 in the religious messaging, what exactly was 00:10:14.919 --> 00:10:17.080 the Confederacy doing on their end? Were they 00:10:17.080 --> 00:10:19.299 using the phrase, in God we trust as well? They 00:10:19.299 --> 00:10:22.179 were actively using it. The sources detail several 00:10:22.179 --> 00:10:24.860 specific examples of Confederate forces employing 00:10:24.860 --> 00:10:27.600 the exact motto. There is a Confederate bunting. 00:10:27.769 --> 00:10:30.809 which is a specialized flag, dated around late 00:10:30.809 --> 00:10:35.610 1861 or early 1862, attributed to the 37th Arkansas 00:10:35.610 --> 00:10:38.009 Infantry Regiment. And right in the center, it 00:10:38.009 --> 00:10:41.129 has, in God we trust, printed on it. This flag 00:10:41.129 --> 00:10:43.590 was actually later captured by the Union's 33rd 00:10:43.590 --> 00:10:46.429 Iowa Infantry Regiment. Another Confederate flag 00:10:46.429 --> 00:10:49.090 belonging to the 60th Tennessee Infantry Regiment 00:10:49.090 --> 00:10:51.470 featured the exact same motto and was captured 00:10:51.470 --> 00:10:54.240 at the Battle of Big Black River Bridge. So it 00:10:54.240 --> 00:10:56.000 was literally being carried on to the battlefield 00:10:56.000 --> 00:10:58.580 by the South. I also see a note here about a 00:10:58.580 --> 00:11:01.779 report from Harper's Weekly in 1864. Yes. Harper's 00:11:01.779 --> 00:11:03.519 Weekly reported that the Union Navy captured 00:11:03.519 --> 00:11:06.139 a Confederate flag that read, our cause is just, 00:11:06.559 --> 00:11:09.039 our duty we know, in God we trust, to battle 00:11:09.039 --> 00:11:12.039 we go. The South even had a highly popular military 00:11:12.039 --> 00:11:14.159 song called The Stars -Bangled Cross and the 00:11:14.159 --> 00:11:16.259 Pure Field of White. And the refrain included 00:11:16.259 --> 00:11:18.860 the lyrics, our trust is in God who can help 00:11:18.860 --> 00:11:21.649 us in fight. So both sides were wielding this 00:11:21.649 --> 00:11:24.690 concept as a weapon of morale and spiritual legitimacy. 00:11:25.029 --> 00:11:26.750 Exactly. It was a propaganda tool. That puts 00:11:26.750 --> 00:11:28.590 Watkinson's letter in a completely different 00:11:28.590 --> 00:11:31.049 light. It wasn't just a random pastor asking 00:11:31.049 --> 00:11:33.809 for a personal favor. It was a strategic plea 00:11:33.809 --> 00:11:37.250 in the middle of a massive propaganda war. Precisely. 00:11:37.330 --> 00:11:39.429 So how did the Union Treasury respond? Did they 00:11:39.429 --> 00:11:41.629 just accept the letter and instantly start minting 00:11:41.629 --> 00:11:45.179 new coins? It actually moved remarkably fast, 00:11:45.720 --> 00:11:48.019 largely because of who was sitting in the Treasury 00:11:48.019 --> 00:11:51.200 Secretary's chair at the time. Reverend Watkinson's 00:11:51.200 --> 00:11:53.759 petition landed on the desk of Salmon P. Chase. 00:11:54.419 --> 00:11:56.340 Who was President Abraham Lincoln's Secretary 00:11:56.340 --> 00:11:59.159 of the Treasury. Right. And Chase was a lifelong... 00:11:59.070 --> 00:12:02.450 deeply evangelical Episcopalian. He was known 00:12:02.450 --> 00:12:05.730 for very public, sometimes ostentatious shows 00:12:05.730 --> 00:12:08.389 of piety. So he didn't just file Watkinson's 00:12:08.389 --> 00:12:10.909 letter away. He immediately directed the director 00:12:10.909 --> 00:12:13.590 of the Philadelphia Mint, a man named James Pollock, 00:12:13.850 --> 00:12:16.590 to begin drafting possible coin designs that 00:12:16.590 --> 00:12:19.570 incorporated a religious phrase. I am so curious 00:12:19.570 --> 00:12:21.990 about the actual drafting process. Did they immediately 00:12:21.990 --> 00:12:24.429 settle on in God we trust or were there other 00:12:24.429 --> 00:12:26.629 contenders being thrown around? There were definitely 00:12:26.629 --> 00:12:29.190 several iterations. We actually have a historical 00:12:29.190 --> 00:12:32.850 document from December 9th, 1863, a letter from 00:12:32.850 --> 00:12:36.570 Chase Topolak, where you can physically see Chase 00:12:36.570 --> 00:12:38.990 workshopping the motto. Oh, like scribbles on 00:12:38.990 --> 00:12:42.929 a page. Exactly. He initially scribbles, In God 00:12:42.929 --> 00:12:45.710 Is Our Trust, drawing directly from Francis Scott 00:12:45.710 --> 00:12:48.889 Key's poem. Then he physically scratches out 00:12:48.889 --> 00:12:53.250 the words is our and overwrites them with we 00:12:53.250 --> 00:12:56.279 arriving at In God We Trust. So he's literally 00:12:56.279 --> 00:12:59.919 editing it down in real time. Yeah. And Numismatist, 00:13:00.080 --> 00:13:02.000 looking closely at the Mint's records, and Jace's 00:13:02.000 --> 00:13:04.139 background note that he was likely also drawing 00:13:04.139 --> 00:13:06.460 inspiration from the motto of Brown University 00:13:06.460 --> 00:13:09.220 in Rhode Island. which is in Dios Paramis. Which 00:13:09.220 --> 00:13:12.620 is Latin for in God, we hope. Exactly. OK, so 00:13:12.620 --> 00:13:15.340 Chase edits it down to four punchy words. But 00:13:15.340 --> 00:13:17.480 the Treasury Secretary can't just unilaterally 00:13:17.480 --> 00:13:19.440 change the currency, right? Doesn't Congress 00:13:19.440 --> 00:13:21.259 have to approve that kind of thing? Correct. 00:13:21.759 --> 00:13:24.019 Chase prepares his recommendation and Congress 00:13:24.019 --> 00:13:27.860 passes the Coinage Act of 1864 on April 22nd. 00:13:28.039 --> 00:13:29.879 This law officially allowed the Secretary of 00:13:29.879 --> 00:13:31.759 the Treasury to authorize the inclusion of the 00:13:31.759 --> 00:13:34.539 phrase on one cent and two cent coins. Later 00:13:34.539 --> 00:13:37.529 that year, The capitalized phrase, In God We 00:13:37.529 --> 00:13:40.389 Trust, made its very first official appearance 00:13:40.389 --> 00:13:43.210 on the bronze two -cent piece. Then the following 00:13:43.210 --> 00:13:47.049 year, In 1865, right before Lincoln is assassinated, 00:13:47.450 --> 00:13:49.809 Congress passes another bill allowing the motto 00:13:49.809 --> 00:13:52.769 on all gold and silver coins that had enough 00:13:52.769 --> 00:13:54.990 physical space for the inscription. We have this 00:13:54.990 --> 00:13:57.549 image of the Civil War era being deeply religious, 00:13:57.549 --> 00:14:00.070 so I'm assuming the public was thrilled to finally 00:14:00.070 --> 00:14:02.129 have this official acknowledgement of God on 00:14:02.129 --> 00:14:04.549 the money. We really have to be careful not to 00:14:04.549 --> 00:14:07.049 view 19th century history through a lens of universal 00:14:07.049 --> 00:14:08.929 consensus. Oh, so they weren't all thrilled. 00:14:09.090 --> 00:14:11.870 Definitely not. The public reaction was highly 00:14:11.870 --> 00:14:14.500 fractured. while many Christian newspapers were 00:14:14.500 --> 00:14:17.240 absolutely thrilled. Though some complained the 00:14:17.240 --> 00:14:19.559 motto actually wasn't religious enough, suggesting 00:14:19.559 --> 00:14:22.320 alternatives like in God alone is our trust or 00:14:22.320 --> 00:14:25.419 even God our Christ. The secular press and the 00:14:25.419 --> 00:14:27.559 non -religious public pushed back aggressively. 00:14:27.879 --> 00:14:29.419 Really? What kind of pushback are we talking 00:14:29.419 --> 00:14:31.500 about? Was it a formal philosophical debate or 00:14:31.500 --> 00:14:33.679 were people just mocking it? Honestly, it was 00:14:33.679 --> 00:14:36.620 both. On the philosophical side, you had major 00:14:36.620 --> 00:14:39.809 editorial boards tearing into the treasury. The 00:14:39.809 --> 00:14:42.110 New York Times wrote a blistering critique, stating, 00:14:42.490 --> 00:14:44.870 quote, Let us try to carry our religion such 00:14:44.870 --> 00:14:48.210 as it is in our hearts and not in our pockets. 00:14:48.409 --> 00:14:50.590 In our hearts, not in our pockets. That is a 00:14:50.590 --> 00:14:53.070 great line. It is. They also pointed out the 00:14:53.070 --> 00:14:55.710 hypocrisy of the mint initially only putting 00:14:55.710 --> 00:14:59.210 the motto on gold and larger silver coins, sarcastically 00:14:59.210 --> 00:15:01.669 suggesting that God seemingly only cared about 00:15:01.669 --> 00:15:04.710 high denomination transactions. Wow. Yeah. And 00:15:04.710 --> 00:15:07.309 the New York Illustrated News ridiculed the coins, 00:15:07.610 --> 00:15:09.509 saying it was the first time that God has ever 00:15:09.509 --> 00:15:11.990 been recognized on any of our counters of mammon. 00:15:12.190 --> 00:15:15.830 Counters of mammon. Man, that is a brutal critique 00:15:15.830 --> 00:15:18.169 of mixing wealth with theology. And I'm seeing 00:15:18.169 --> 00:15:20.450 notes here that the general public just started 00:15:20.450 --> 00:15:22.509 making puns about it, too. Oh, the general public 00:15:22.509 --> 00:15:24.809 immediately started mocking it in daily commerce. 00:15:25.100 --> 00:15:27.320 The American Journal of Numismatics suggested 00:15:27.320 --> 00:15:29.860 that people would misread the motto as, in gold 00:15:29.860 --> 00:15:32.500 we trust, arguing that was a much more accurate 00:15:32.500 --> 00:15:35.039 reflection of American commerce anyway. Uh -huh. 00:15:35.159 --> 00:15:39.100 In gold we trust. Yeah. And newspapers in the 00:15:39.100 --> 00:15:41.639 1860s started reporting on shopkeepers putting 00:15:41.639 --> 00:15:43.620 up signs in their windows, playing off the motto. 00:15:44.059 --> 00:15:45.879 You would walk into a general store and see a 00:15:45.879 --> 00:15:49.799 sign that said, in God we trust terms cash. In 00:15:49.799 --> 00:15:52.340 God we trust terms cash. Or another one was, 00:15:52.620 --> 00:15:55.500 in God we trust. all others are expected to pay 00:15:55.500 --> 00:15:57.980 cash. So it basically became a 19th century meme, 00:15:58.100 --> 00:16:00.799 in God we trust all others pay cash. Exactly. 00:16:01.059 --> 00:16:03.600 But despite the secular pushback and the shopkeeper 00:16:03.600 --> 00:16:06.460 jokes, the phrase obviously survived the Civil 00:16:06.460 --> 00:16:09.120 War. By the late 19th century, it seems to evolve 00:16:09.120 --> 00:16:12.600 from a wartime morale booster into a fairly settled 00:16:12.600 --> 00:16:15.080 symbol of national pride. Right. But if the issue 00:16:15.080 --> 00:16:17.879 was settled, why do we see a massive controversy 00:16:17.879 --> 00:16:20.279 erupt in the early 20th century? I'm looking 00:16:20.279 --> 00:16:21.860 at the notes on President Theodore Roosevelt 00:16:21.860 --> 00:16:24.399 and his actions regarding the motto seem completely 00:16:24.399 --> 00:16:27.139 contradictory to his public persona. What exactly 00:16:27.139 --> 00:16:30.000 did Teddy Roosevelt do? So to understand the 00:16:30.000 --> 00:16:32.559 1907 controversy, we have to look at Theodore 00:16:32.559 --> 00:16:34.279 Roosevelt's aesthetic vision for the country. 00:16:34.639 --> 00:16:37.399 In 1904, Roosevelt decided that the physical 00:16:37.399 --> 00:16:40.059 look of American money was stale and unimpressive. 00:16:40.379 --> 00:16:43.159 He was a man of immense energy and vision, and 00:16:43.159 --> 00:16:45.639 he believed American coins should rival the high 00:16:45.639 --> 00:16:49.120 -relief beauty of ancient Greek currency. So 00:16:49.120 --> 00:16:51.879 he totally bypassed the U .S. Mint's engravers 00:16:51.879 --> 00:16:55.080 and hired his personal friend, the renowned sculptor 00:16:55.080 --> 00:16:57.419 Augustus Saint -Gaudens. Saint -Gaudens is a 00:16:57.419 --> 00:17:00.330 legend. Absolute legend. So Roosevelt hires him 00:17:00.330 --> 00:17:03.789 to completely redesign the $10 eagle and $20 00:17:03.789 --> 00:17:07.470 double eagle gold coins. After years of delays 00:17:07.470 --> 00:17:10.450 due to St. Goldin's failing health, the sculpture 00:17:10.450 --> 00:17:12.309 produced a design that is still considered one 00:17:12.309 --> 00:17:14.269 of the most beautiful coins ever struck by the 00:17:14.269 --> 00:17:16.549 United States. But there was a catch. A huge 00:17:16.549 --> 00:17:19.009 catch. There was a shocking omission. Roosevelt 00:17:19.009 --> 00:17:22.130 had specifically directly instructed St. Goldin's 00:17:22.130 --> 00:17:24.630 to leave the motto in God we trust completely 00:17:24.630 --> 00:17:27.240 off the new coins. I am really struggling to 00:17:27.240 --> 00:17:28.859 square that with everything I know about Theodore 00:17:28.859 --> 00:17:31.799 Roosevelt. He was a conservative icon, a moralist, 00:17:32.019 --> 00:17:33.880 a man who spoke frequently about righteousness. 00:17:34.480 --> 00:17:36.640 Why on earth would he order the removal of the 00:17:36.640 --> 00:17:39.140 national motto from the currency? Was he secretly 00:17:39.140 --> 00:17:41.619 harboring anti -religious sentiments? Not at 00:17:41.619 --> 00:17:43.759 all. His rationale was exactly the opposite. 00:17:44.240 --> 00:17:47.380 Roosevelt was fiercely protecting religion. Protecting 00:17:47.380 --> 00:17:50.160 religion by removing God from the coin. Yes. 00:17:50.480 --> 00:17:52.839 He felt that putting the name of God on physical 00:17:52.839 --> 00:17:56.059 money was, in his own words, dangerously close 00:17:56.059 --> 00:17:59.640 to sacrilege. Roosevelt was deeply aware of how 00:17:59.640 --> 00:18:02.579 money circulated in the real world. Money was 00:18:02.579 --> 00:18:05.039 used in brothels. It was used to buy off corrupt 00:18:05.039 --> 00:18:07.900 politicians. It was wagered in gambling dens. 00:18:08.359 --> 00:18:10.779 It facilitated violent crime. Oh, I see where 00:18:10.779 --> 00:18:13.779 this is going. To Roosevelt, taking a holy sentiment 00:18:13.779 --> 00:18:16.000 and stamping it onto the ultimate instrument 00:18:16.000 --> 00:18:19.519 of vice and world commerce was deeply irreverent. 00:18:19.619 --> 00:18:22.420 So his argument is that money is inherently profane 00:18:22.420 --> 00:18:25.460 and mixing the sacred name of God with the profane 00:18:25.460 --> 00:18:28.160 transactions of daily life actually degrades 00:18:28.160 --> 00:18:31.160 the sacred. Exactly. Did he articulate this publicly 00:18:31.160 --> 00:18:33.299 at the time or was this just a private thought? 00:18:33.799 --> 00:18:35.680 He articulated it very clearly when the controversy 00:18:35.680 --> 00:18:38.339 broke. We have a letter he wrote in November 00:18:38.339 --> 00:18:41.579 1907. defending his decision. Roosevelt stated 00:18:41.579 --> 00:18:44.079 quote, my own feeling in the matter is due to 00:18:44.079 --> 00:18:46.680 my very firm conviction that to put such a motto 00:18:46.680 --> 00:18:49.599 on coins or to use it in any kindred manner not 00:18:49.599 --> 00:18:52.519 only does no good, but does positive harm. He 00:18:52.519 --> 00:18:55.619 goes on, any use which tends to cheapen it and 00:18:55.619 --> 00:18:58.059 above all, any use which tends to secure it's 00:18:58.059 --> 00:19:00.980 being treated in a spirit of levity is from every 00:19:00.980 --> 00:19:04.250 standpoint profoundly to be regretted. Wow. He 00:19:04.250 --> 00:19:06.210 pointed out that in all his life he had never 00:19:06.210 --> 00:19:08.410 heard a human being speak reverently of the motto 00:19:08.410 --> 00:19:11.869 on coins. Instead, he had heard it used hundreds 00:19:11.869 --> 00:19:15.150 of times as an incitement to sneering and levity. 00:19:15.950 --> 00:19:18.690 He explicitly referenced those shopkeeper cartoons, 00:19:19.150 --> 00:19:22.769 In God We Trust for the Eight Cents. He felt 00:19:22.769 --> 00:19:25.490 that kind of constant low -level mocking was 00:19:25.490 --> 00:19:28.670 a daily insult to God. That is, that is incredibly 00:19:28.670 --> 00:19:31.619 deep. And what about St. Godden's? Did the sculptor 00:19:31.619 --> 00:19:33.619 agree with Roosevelt's theological arguments, 00:19:34.079 --> 00:19:36.119 or did he just want the words off his art? St. 00:19:36.299 --> 00:19:38.829 Godin's totally agreed to leave it off. But primarily 00:19:38.829 --> 00:19:41.569 for aesthetic reasons. He felt that the mandated 00:19:41.569 --> 00:19:43.950 lettering just cluttered up his beautiful ancient 00:19:43.950 --> 00:19:46.630 Greek -inspired design. He wanted clean lines, 00:19:46.789 --> 00:19:48.950 not paragraphs of text. I can definitely appreciate 00:19:48.950 --> 00:19:51.029 the aesthetic argument. And honestly, Roosevelt's 00:19:51.029 --> 00:19:52.910 theological argument is incredibly profound. 00:19:53.130 --> 00:19:55.809 But did the public of 1907 actually buy the argument 00:19:55.809 --> 00:19:58.009 that leaving God off the coin was a pro -religion 00:19:58.009 --> 00:20:01.289 move? They absolutely did not. The backlash was 00:20:01.289 --> 00:20:05.039 nuclear. Nuclear. When the new, incredibly beautiful, 00:20:05.339 --> 00:20:08.140 but model -less gold coins entered circulation 00:20:08.140 --> 00:20:12.779 in late 1907, a nationwide scandal erupted. Christian 00:20:12.779 --> 00:20:15.420 organizations, temperance leagues, and newspapers 00:20:15.420 --> 00:20:17.980 launched blistering attacks on the president. 00:20:18.480 --> 00:20:21.319 They accused Roosevelt of an arrogant, premeditated 00:20:21.319 --> 00:20:23.440 assault on the Christian faith. That escalated 00:20:23.440 --> 00:20:25.559 quickly. The Atlantic Constitution published 00:20:25.559 --> 00:20:28.279 a dramatic editorial essentially telling the 00:20:28.279 --> 00:20:30.059 American people that they had to choose between 00:20:30.059 --> 00:20:33.559 God and Roosevelt. The New York Sun even published 00:20:33.559 --> 00:20:36.279 a satirical poem mocking his hubris. That is 00:20:36.279 --> 00:20:39.140 a staggering level of outrage over a coin design. 00:20:39.339 --> 00:20:41.279 Did anyone side with Roosevelt in the press? 00:20:41.539 --> 00:20:43.559 It wasn't completely one -sided. The New York 00:20:43.559 --> 00:20:45.420 Times, the Chicago Tribune, and some religious 00:20:45.420 --> 00:20:47.839 publications like the Churchman actually defended 00:20:47.839 --> 00:20:50.539 the president. They agreed with his premise that 00:20:50.539 --> 00:20:53.140 money wasn't a sacred object and that faith didn't 00:20:53.140 --> 00:20:55.759 need to be validated by the U .S. Mint. But I'm 00:20:55.759 --> 00:20:58.119 guessing they were in the minority. Vastly in 00:20:58.119 --> 00:21:00.940 the minority. The sheer volume of outrage from 00:21:00.940 --> 00:21:03.160 the broader public and religious lobbying groups 00:21:03.160 --> 00:21:06.059 completely stunned Roosevelt. He dug his heels 00:21:06.059 --> 00:21:08.200 in for a bit, arguing he fully supported the 00:21:08.200 --> 00:21:10.299 motto on public buildings and national monuments, 00:21:10.740 --> 00:21:14.319 just not on cash. But in American politics, overwhelming 00:21:14.319 --> 00:21:16.680 public pressure usually forces a capitulation. 00:21:17.200 --> 00:21:18.920 So how did it get resolved? Did Congress have 00:21:18.920 --> 00:21:22.140 to step in and override the president? Yes. Congress 00:21:22.140 --> 00:21:24.500 recognized that this was a totally losing battle 00:21:24.500 --> 00:21:28.039 for the administration. In 1908, they quickly 00:21:28.039 --> 00:21:30.279 passed an act mandating the reinstatement of 00:21:30.279 --> 00:21:33.180 the motto on all gold and silver coins. So the 00:21:33.180 --> 00:21:35.660 beautiful coins got ruined. Well, the Mint's 00:21:35.660 --> 00:21:37.759 chief engraver, Charles Z. Barber, who actually 00:21:37.759 --> 00:21:39.839 had a bitter professional rivalry with St. Gaudens 00:21:39.839 --> 00:21:42.440 anyway, hastily altered the sculptor's masterpiece 00:21:42.440 --> 00:21:45.220 to squeeze the words back into the design. And 00:21:45.220 --> 00:21:48.019 by 1938, subsequent legislation ensured the mandate 00:21:48.019 --> 00:21:50.420 covered every single U .S. coin in production. 00:21:50.599 --> 00:21:52.980 The philosophical debate there is just fascinating. 00:21:53.500 --> 00:21:56.000 Does putting a deeply religious sentiment on 00:21:56.000 --> 00:21:58.700 an item of daily secular commerce cheapen the 00:21:58.700 --> 00:22:01.480 religion? Does stamping God's name on a coin 00:22:01.480 --> 00:22:03.619 used to buy a pack of cigarettes degrade the 00:22:03.619 --> 00:22:07.039 sacred? Roosevelt thought yes, but the public, 00:22:07.259 --> 00:22:09.579 and ultimately the law, emphatically thought 00:22:09.579 --> 00:22:12.099 no. Yeah, the public wanted it there. But I noticed 00:22:12.099 --> 00:22:14.259 something interesting in the timeline here. If 00:22:14.259 --> 00:22:16.460 the government was this comfortable mandating 00:22:16.460 --> 00:22:19.640 the motto on coins in the 1860s and then remandating 00:22:19.640 --> 00:22:22.759 it in 1908, why did it take almost another half 00:22:22.759 --> 00:22:25.440 century to get it onto paper money? That is one 00:22:25.440 --> 00:22:27.440 of the most interesting aspects of this history. 00:22:27.630 --> 00:22:30.349 Up until the mid 20th century, In God We Trust 00:22:30.349 --> 00:22:32.910 was strictly a numismatic phenomenon. It was 00:22:32.910 --> 00:22:35.009 only on coins. So paper bills were completely 00:22:35.009 --> 00:22:37.569 secular. The paper dollars, the five dollar bills, 00:22:37.730 --> 00:22:40.349 the ten dollar bills in your wallet were entirely 00:22:40.349 --> 00:22:43.230 secular. The shift to mandate the motto on paper 00:22:43.230 --> 00:22:45.769 currency doesn't happen until the 1950s. And 00:22:45.769 --> 00:22:48.569 the sources present two dueling historical theories 00:22:48.569 --> 00:22:50.910 as to why that massive shift occurred when it 00:22:50.910 --> 00:22:53.480 did. OK, let's break those down. What is the 00:22:53.480 --> 00:22:55.880 traditional theory for why paper money suddenly 00:22:55.880 --> 00:22:58.980 needed the motto in the 1950s? The most widely 00:22:58.980 --> 00:23:01.880 accepted historical view is that the universal 00:23:01.880 --> 00:23:05.559 mandate was a direct ideological weapon deployed 00:23:05.559 --> 00:23:09.319 during the Cold War. Cold War history. In the 00:23:09.319 --> 00:23:12.740 1950s, the United States was locked in an existential 00:23:12.740 --> 00:23:16.170 global struggle with the Soviet Union. The USSR 00:23:16.170 --> 00:23:19.450 actively promoted state atheism and implemented 00:23:19.450 --> 00:23:22.390 strict, brutal anti -religious legislation. So 00:23:22.390 --> 00:23:24.329 the U .S. wanted to contrast itself with that. 00:23:24.589 --> 00:23:26.890 Exactly. In response, the U .S. government sought 00:23:26.890 --> 00:23:29.809 to clearly, officially distinguish itself as 00:23:29.809 --> 00:23:32.630 a moral, religious counterweight to Soviet communism. 00:23:33.250 --> 00:23:35.690 We see this explicit justification in the legislative 00:23:35.690 --> 00:23:39.099 record. In 1955, a Democratic representative 00:23:39.099 --> 00:23:41.720 from Florida named Charles Edward Bennett introduced 00:23:41.720 --> 00:23:44.180 the bill to require the motto on all banknotes. 00:23:44.440 --> 00:23:46.559 Did Bennett explicitly mention the Soviets in 00:23:46.559 --> 00:23:49.079 his reasoning? He did. His reasoning was unambiguous. 00:23:49.460 --> 00:23:51.960 He argued on the floor that, quote, In these 00:23:51.960 --> 00:23:54.359 days when imperialistic and materialistic communism 00:23:54.359 --> 00:23:56.759 seeks to attack and destroy freedom, we should 00:23:56.759 --> 00:23:58.920 continually look for ways to strengthen the foundations 00:23:58.920 --> 00:24:01.029 of our freedom. For Bennett and his colleagues, 00:24:01.390 --> 00:24:03.329 putting God on paper money wasn't just about 00:24:03.329 --> 00:24:06.210 domestic piety. It was a literal ideological 00:24:06.210 --> 00:24:09.690 shield against the Soviet threat. That perfectly 00:24:09.690 --> 00:24:11.730 aligns with the context of the Red Scare and 00:24:11.730 --> 00:24:14.250 the nuclear arms race. But I'm looking at theory 00:24:14.250 --> 00:24:16.970 two, the one proposed by historian Kevin M. Cruz. 00:24:17.190 --> 00:24:20.069 He basically argues the Cold War was just a smokescreen. 00:24:20.309 --> 00:24:23.349 What is his argument? Kevin Cruz, in his work 00:24:23.349 --> 00:24:26.369 on Christian nationalism, offers a really fascinating 00:24:26.369 --> 00:24:29.460 alternative explanation. His view is that the 00:24:29.460 --> 00:24:32.799 drive to expand the motto in the 1950s was actually 00:24:32.799 --> 00:24:35.299 spearheaded by domestic conservative opposition 00:24:35.299 --> 00:24:37.920 to Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. The New 00:24:37.920 --> 00:24:40.019 Deal. How does that connect to the motto? According 00:24:40.019 --> 00:24:43.160 to Cruz, throughout the 1930s and 40s, business 00:24:43.160 --> 00:24:45.420 leaders and conservative politicians were desperate 00:24:45.420 --> 00:24:47.980 to roll back the secular government -heavy regulations 00:24:47.980 --> 00:24:50.500 of the New Deal things like labor rights and 00:24:50.500 --> 00:24:53.240 the welfare state. They found that purely economic 00:24:53.240 --> 00:24:55.299 arguments weren't winning over the public. So 00:24:55.299 --> 00:24:57.700 they pivoted. They pivoted hard. They successfully 00:24:57.700 --> 00:25:00.119 campaigned to merge the ideas of free enterprise 00:25:00.119 --> 00:25:03.299 capitalism with Christianity, creating a movement 00:25:03.299 --> 00:25:06.160 Cruz calls Christian libertarianism. Okay, so 00:25:06.160 --> 00:25:08.640 if I am understanding Cruz correctly, by lobbying 00:25:08.640 --> 00:25:11.680 to make the nation officially under God, corporate 00:25:11.680 --> 00:25:14.799 America was basically trying to frame unregulated 00:25:14.799 --> 00:25:18.579 capitalism as a divine mandate. Positioning government 00:25:18.579 --> 00:25:21.220 regulation is not just economically bad, but 00:25:21.220 --> 00:25:23.920 anti -Christian. Exactly. Organizations like 00:25:23.920 --> 00:25:26.240 Spiritual Mobilization, led by Reverend James 00:25:26.240 --> 00:25:29.460 W. Fifield, Jr., and backed by major industrialists, 00:25:29.720 --> 00:25:32.319 push this narrative heavily. Cruz argues that 00:25:32.319 --> 00:25:34.680 the Cold War was just a convenient, unassailable 00:25:34.680 --> 00:25:37.579 excuse to finalize a domestic project that had 00:25:37.579 --> 00:25:39.900 been in the works for 20 years. They were marrying 00:25:39.900 --> 00:25:42.680 conservative politics, corporate interests, and 00:25:42.680 --> 00:25:44.720 public religion. Are we sure it wasn't just a 00:25:44.720 --> 00:25:47.259 combination of both, like a domestic push for 00:25:47.259 --> 00:25:50.000 Christian capitalism that found the perfect legislative 00:25:50.000 --> 00:25:52.640 vehicle in the anti -communist panic of the Cold 00:25:52.640 --> 00:25:55.539 War. The historical consensus generally acknowledges 00:25:55.539 --> 00:25:58.279 that both forces were absolutely at play. The 00:25:58.279 --> 00:26:00.240 ground for this was incredibly fertile because 00:26:00.240 --> 00:26:02.440 of the tone set by the Eisenhower administration. 00:26:02.740 --> 00:26:06.299 Dwight D. Eisenhower. Yes. Eisenhower led a government 00:26:06.299 --> 00:26:09.259 with a deeply public religious tenor. He was 00:26:09.259 --> 00:26:11.400 heavily influenced by prominent evangelists of 00:26:11.400 --> 00:26:14.539 the era, most notably Billy Graham, who was advising 00:26:14.539 --> 00:26:16.880 politicians that a religious revival was strictly 00:26:16.880 --> 00:26:20.660 necessary to save America. There was intense 00:26:20.660 --> 00:26:22.940 coordinated public lobbying from groups like 00:26:22.940 --> 00:26:25.180 the American Numismatic Association and the American 00:26:25.180 --> 00:26:28.119 Legion to expand the use of the motto. And the 00:26:28.119 --> 00:26:30.500 momentum just snowballs from there. I see in 00:26:30.500 --> 00:26:33.940 the notes that in 1954, In God We Trust appears 00:26:33.940 --> 00:26:36.519 on a U .S. postage stamp for the very first time, 00:26:36.599 --> 00:26:38.759 an eight -cent stamp featuring the Statue of 00:26:38.759 --> 00:26:42.920 Liberty. Then, on July 11, 1955, Congress passes 00:26:42.920 --> 00:26:45.559 the law with bipartisan support, mandating the 00:26:45.559 --> 00:26:48.200 phrase on all paper currency. Eisenhower signs 00:26:48.200 --> 00:26:50.700 it, and it shows up on the $1 silver certificate 00:26:50.700 --> 00:26:53.799 in October 1957. But they didn't stop at just 00:26:53.799 --> 00:26:55.779 money, did they? No, they took it to the absolute 00:26:55.779 --> 00:26:58.440 highest symbolic level possible. On July 30, 00:26:58.519 --> 00:27:01.539 1956, the 84th Congress passed a joint resolution 00:27:01.539 --> 00:27:04.779 officially declaring In God We Trust as the singular 00:27:04.779 --> 00:27:07.019 national motto of the United States. Wow. It 00:27:07.019 --> 00:27:09.039 cast the House and the Senate unanimously without 00:27:09.039 --> 00:27:12.160 a single recorded debate. Yes. It officially 00:27:12.160 --> 00:27:16.059 replaced the de facto secular Latin motto. e 00:27:16.059 --> 00:27:18.980 pluribus unum, which means out of many, one, 00:27:19.380 --> 00:27:21.059 which had been used since the founding of the 00:27:21.059 --> 00:27:24.299 country. So we go from a militia flag in 1748 00:27:24.299 --> 00:27:27.700 to coins in the 1860s to all paper money and 00:27:27.700 --> 00:27:31.599 the official national motto in 1956. Once it 00:27:31.599 --> 00:27:33.339 becomes the official motto, how does that shift 00:27:33.339 --> 00:27:35.500 the cultural battle? Because the federal government 00:27:35.500 --> 00:27:37.839 has made its decree, but the outline shows that 00:27:37.839 --> 00:27:39.859 the modern history of the modern is really the 00:27:39.859 --> 00:27:42.900 story of local culture wars. How did state governments 00:27:42.900 --> 00:27:45.680 start weaponizing or adopting this? Once the 00:27:45.680 --> 00:27:47.460 federal government established it as the official 00:27:47.460 --> 00:27:49.839 motto, it essentially gave a massive green light 00:27:49.839 --> 00:27:52.400 to state legislature. to weave it into their 00:27:52.400 --> 00:27:55.319 own local symbolism. We see a massive wave of 00:27:55.319 --> 00:27:57.799 state -level adoption, particularly in the 21st 00:27:57.799 --> 00:28:00.059 century. Okay, give me some examples. In 2006, 00:28:00.640 --> 00:28:03.319 Florida passed a lawmaking in God We Trust, their 00:28:03.319 --> 00:28:05.920 official state motto, and it is featured prominently 00:28:05.920 --> 00:28:09.180 on their state seal and state flag. Georgia incorporated 00:28:09.180 --> 00:28:11.839 it into their flag design in 2001. And Mississippi 00:28:11.839 --> 00:28:14.200 has been particularly aggressive about this recently, 00:28:14.359 --> 00:28:17.269 right? Yes. Mississippi has been at the forefront. 00:28:17.589 --> 00:28:20.630 They added it to their state seal in 2014, with 00:28:20.630 --> 00:28:22.930 lawmakers offering the explicit justification 00:28:22.930 --> 00:28:25.009 that they were protecting religious freedom. 00:28:25.809 --> 00:28:28.390 Then in 2020, during the national reckoning over 00:28:28.390 --> 00:28:31.369 racial injustice, Mississippi faced immense pressure 00:28:31.369 --> 00:28:34.230 to retire its old state flag, which contained 00:28:34.230 --> 00:28:36.589 the Confederate battle emblem. Right, I remember 00:28:36.589 --> 00:28:38.910 that. The legislature agreed to remove the Confederate 00:28:38.910 --> 00:28:41.430 imagery, but they passed a law requiring that 00:28:41.430 --> 00:28:44.349 any new flag design must feature the words, in 00:28:44.349 --> 00:28:47.339 God we trust. Voters approved the new design 00:28:47.339 --> 00:28:50.880 and it became official in 2021. That is a fascinating 00:28:50.880 --> 00:28:52.940 trade -off, removing a symbol of the Confederacy 00:28:52.940 --> 00:28:55.380 but legally mandating the inclusion of a religious 00:28:55.380 --> 00:28:57.799 motto. But where this really hits the ground 00:28:57.799 --> 00:29:00.140 for everyday families isn't just flags, it's 00:29:00.140 --> 00:29:02.960 the school mandates. I'm seeing a massive list 00:29:02.960 --> 00:29:05.099 of states requiring this in public classrooms. 00:29:05.460 --> 00:29:07.660 What is driving this recent legislative push? 00:29:08.019 --> 00:29:10.500 The wave of school mandates over the last decade 00:29:10.500 --> 00:29:13.740 has been highly organized. As we review the sources, 00:29:14.019 --> 00:29:17.880 a clear map emerges. Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, 00:29:18.140 --> 00:29:21.200 South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia 00:29:21.200 --> 00:29:24.180 have all passed laws either requiring schools 00:29:24.180 --> 00:29:27.279 to display the motto prominently or mandating 00:29:27.279 --> 00:29:29.660 that if a privately donated poster containing 00:29:29.660 --> 00:29:32.279 the motto is given to a school, the school is 00:29:32.279 --> 00:29:34.640 legally obligated to hang it up in a conspicuous 00:29:34.640 --> 00:29:38.279 place. Legally obligated? Yes. Much of this legislation 00:29:38.279 --> 00:29:40.759 is drafted and promoted by conservative Christian 00:29:40.759 --> 00:29:43.500 organizations and legislative coalitions. Their 00:29:43.500 --> 00:29:46.480 stated goal is to reintroduce historical Judeo 00:29:46.480 --> 00:29:48.259 -Christian principles into the public sphere. 00:29:48.490 --> 00:29:51.829 For example, in Louisiana, a 2018 law not only 00:29:51.829 --> 00:29:53.869 mandated the display but required instruction 00:29:53.869 --> 00:29:56.130 about the motto as part of the social studies 00:29:56.130 --> 00:29:57.890 curriculum. It's a part of the actual teaching. 00:29:57.990 --> 00:30:01.250 It is. A subsequent 2023 Louisiana law went even 00:30:01.250 --> 00:30:03.630 further, requiring the motto to be hung in every 00:30:03.630 --> 00:30:05.569 single classroom in the state. I saw something 00:30:05.569 --> 00:30:07.630 in the notes about a school district in Kentucky 00:30:07.630 --> 00:30:10.349 finding a very literal loophole to a similar 00:30:10.349 --> 00:30:13.269 mandate. How did they handle the law? Oh, this 00:30:13.269 --> 00:30:16.190 is a brilliant example of how local interpretation 00:30:16.190 --> 00:30:20.319 shapes state mandates. In 2019, Kentucky passed 00:30:20.319 --> 00:30:23.619 a law requiring public schools to display the 00:30:23.619 --> 00:30:26.940 motto in a prominent location. Okay. To protest 00:30:26.940 --> 00:30:28.819 what they viewed as a heavy -handed religious 00:30:28.819 --> 00:30:31.460 requirement, a school district that serves Lexington 00:30:31.460 --> 00:30:34.160 Fayette County Public Schools decided to comply 00:30:34.160 --> 00:30:36.519 with the exact letter of the law in the most 00:30:36.519 --> 00:30:38.960 literal way possible. What did they do? They 00:30:38.960 --> 00:30:41.539 simply printed out oversized color copies of 00:30:41.539 --> 00:30:44.259 the back of a $1 bill, framed them, and hung 00:30:44.259 --> 00:30:46.740 them on the walls. Because the dollar bill already 00:30:46.740 --> 00:30:49.039 has the national motto legally printed on it. 00:30:49.359 --> 00:30:51.740 Exactly. Another district in Kentucky, LaRue 00:30:51.740 --> 00:30:54.660 County, complied by using oversized images of 00:30:54.660 --> 00:30:57.319 pennies. That is amazing. They followed the law 00:30:57.319 --> 00:31:00.200 perfectly, avoiding any legal penalties, but 00:31:00.200 --> 00:31:02.380 totally subverted the religious intent behind 00:31:02.380 --> 00:31:05.359 the legislation by highlighting the secular financial 00:31:05.359 --> 00:31:08.119 context of the phrase. It is malicious compliance 00:31:08.119 --> 00:31:10.640 at its finest. That is incredible. And speaking 00:31:10.640 --> 00:31:12.759 of state mandates, we have to look at the highway. 00:31:12.839 --> 00:31:15.660 The outline mentions the license plate wars. 00:31:16.259 --> 00:31:19.019 What is the friction point there? As of 2021, 00:31:19.579 --> 00:31:23.039 over 20 states offer an in God we trust license 00:31:23.039 --> 00:31:25.900 plate as either a standard or a vanity option. 00:31:26.119 --> 00:31:28.940 In states like Florida and North Carolina, you 00:31:28.940 --> 00:31:31.000 can choose to swap out the state nickname for 00:31:31.000 --> 00:31:33.140 the motto. Which seems fine if it's an option. 00:31:33.359 --> 00:31:35.400 Right, the legal friction points usually occur 00:31:35.400 --> 00:31:37.599 when a state tries to make the motto the default, 00:31:37.839 --> 00:31:40.480 unavoidable standard for everyone. Mississippi 00:31:40.480 --> 00:31:43.460 did exactly this in 2019 when they approved a 00:31:43.460 --> 00:31:45.720 new standard plate design that featured the state 00:31:45.720 --> 00:31:48.400 seal, which naturally included In God We Trust. 00:31:48.480 --> 00:31:50.859 So you had to get it. That meant every driver 00:31:50.859 --> 00:31:53.170 in the state regardless of their personal beliefs, 00:31:53.609 --> 00:31:55.910 had to carry that phrase on their car unless 00:31:55.910 --> 00:31:58.029 they paid an extra fee for a specialty plate. 00:31:58.289 --> 00:32:00.509 Which perfectly brings us to the final and perhaps 00:32:00.509 --> 00:32:03.589 most complex part of our deep dive. The legal 00:32:03.589 --> 00:32:06.069 labyrinth. Because you can't have a religious 00:32:06.069 --> 00:32:09.529 phrase mandated on currency in public school 00:32:09.529 --> 00:32:11.869 classrooms and on standard license plates without 00:32:11.869 --> 00:32:13.769 running headfirst into the First Amendment of 00:32:13.769 --> 00:32:17.109 the U .S. Constitution. Specifically, the Establishment 00:32:17.109 --> 00:32:19.549 Clause, which prohibits the government from making 00:32:19.549 --> 00:32:22.109 any law respecting an establishment of religion. 00:32:22.670 --> 00:32:25.450 How does mandating this everywhere not violate 00:32:25.450 --> 00:32:28.170 the separation of church and state? Let's clearly 00:32:28.170 --> 00:32:30.470 define the core conflict here, maintaining our 00:32:30.470 --> 00:32:33.240 strict impartiality. Right. On one side you have 00:32:33.240 --> 00:32:36.900 secular, humanist, and atheist groups. Organizations 00:32:36.900 --> 00:32:38.980 like Americans United for Separation of Church 00:32:38.980 --> 00:32:41.619 and State, the Freedom from Religion Foundation, 00:32:42.359 --> 00:32:45.400 and the Satanic Temple. Their legal argument 00:32:45.400 --> 00:32:47.799 is straightforward. Right. They perceive the 00:32:47.799 --> 00:32:50.740 motto as a direct, undeniable religious statement. 00:32:50.900 --> 00:32:53.140 Which makes sense. They argue that by printing 00:32:53.319 --> 00:32:56.220 In God We Trust, on currency and forcing its 00:32:56.220 --> 00:32:58.519 display in public schools, the government is 00:32:58.519 --> 00:33:01.079 violating the Establishment Clause, alienating 00:33:01.079 --> 00:33:04.039 non -believers, and implicitly defining the specific 00:33:04.039 --> 00:33:06.500 monotheistic type of God the nation supposedly 00:33:06.500 --> 00:33:08.940 trusts. And on the other side? On the other side, 00:33:09.079 --> 00:33:10.980 you have conservative lawmakers and advocacy 00:33:10.980 --> 00:33:14.160 groups who actively lobby for the motto's adoption. 00:33:14.490 --> 00:33:17.289 These proponents argue that the motto is a traditional 00:33:17.289 --> 00:33:20.690 element of American civil religion. Civil religion. 00:33:20.869 --> 00:33:23.930 Yes. They maintain it simply expresses the historical 00:33:23.930 --> 00:33:27.569 will of the founders and serves as a patriotic 00:33:27.569 --> 00:33:30.789 historical symbol rather than a purely theological 00:33:30.789 --> 00:33:34.549 or coercive one. So you have two incredibly strong 00:33:34.549 --> 00:33:37.450 fundamentally opposed views. Secularists say 00:33:37.450 --> 00:33:39.529 it's an unconstitutional establishment of religion. 00:33:39.750 --> 00:33:42.170 Proponents say it's just harmless historical 00:33:42.170 --> 00:33:45.450 patriotism. How on earth does the judiciary handle 00:33:45.450 --> 00:33:48.769 this? How has the motto survived decades of lawsuits 00:33:48.769 --> 00:33:51.589 trying to scrape it off the currency? The federal 00:33:51.589 --> 00:33:54.730 courts have relied on two primary judicial philosophies 00:33:54.730 --> 00:33:57.150 to uphold the constitutionality of the motto. 00:33:57.589 --> 00:34:00.099 The first is accommodationism. Accommodationism. 00:34:00.299 --> 00:34:02.759 Yes. Yes. This legal doctrine allows the government 00:34:02.759 --> 00:34:05.559 to acknowledge or endorse religious establishments 00:34:05.559 --> 00:34:07.519 or sentiments as long as they are all treated 00:34:07.519 --> 00:34:10.380 equally. The practices are not legally coercive, 00:34:10.539 --> 00:34:12.800 meaning you aren't forced to pray or attend church 00:34:12.800 --> 00:34:15.300 and they don't prefer one specific religious 00:34:15.300 --> 00:34:17.900 denomination over another. Under this view. The 00:34:17.900 --> 00:34:20.460 courts look at historical practice and essentially 00:34:20.460 --> 00:34:23.300 conclude, this has been going on for a long time 00:34:23.300 --> 00:34:26.239 without establishing a theocracy. So it's a permissible 00:34:26.239 --> 00:34:28.679 accommodation of the nation's religious heritage. 00:34:29.000 --> 00:34:31.920 OK, so accommodationism is basically saying it's 00:34:31.920 --> 00:34:34.260 tradition, it's not hurting anyone, and it doesn't 00:34:34.260 --> 00:34:36.960 force you into a pew. I can see how courts lean 00:34:36.960 --> 00:34:39.619 on that. But the second legal concept you mentioned 00:34:39.619 --> 00:34:41.880 earlier in the notes is the one that really confuses 00:34:41.880 --> 00:34:47.210 me. Ceremonial deism. What exactly is that? Ceremonial 00:34:47.210 --> 00:34:50.550 deism is a crucial, heavily debated legal concept. 00:34:51.190 --> 00:34:54.150 It was originally coined in a 1984 Supreme Court 00:34:54.150 --> 00:34:56.750 dissent by Justice William Brennan in a case 00:34:56.750 --> 00:34:59.070 called Lynch v. Donnelly. What was that case 00:34:59.070 --> 00:35:01.469 about? It was actually about a Christmas nativity 00:35:01.469 --> 00:35:04.349 scene on public property. The premise of ceremonial 00:35:04.349 --> 00:35:07.010 deism is that certain religious references, through 00:35:07.010 --> 00:35:09.489 their constant repetitious and customary usage 00:35:09.489 --> 00:35:12.349 over decades or centuries, actually lose their 00:35:12.349 --> 00:35:15.010 original specific theological meaning. Wait, 00:35:15.110 --> 00:35:18.070 really? Yes. They are stripped of their religious 00:35:18.070 --> 00:35:22.400 connotation and become entirely secular patriotic 00:35:22.400 --> 00:35:25.719 or ceremonial phrases. Therefore, because they 00:35:25.719 --> 00:35:28.300 have been effectively secularized by rote repetition, 00:35:28.820 --> 00:35:31.000 they do not violate the establishment clause. 00:35:31.300 --> 00:35:33.460 I have to push back on the logic of ceremonial 00:35:33.460 --> 00:35:36.980 deism. If the legal defense for keeping in God 00:35:36.980 --> 00:35:39.119 we trust on the money is that the phrase has 00:35:39.119 --> 00:35:41.579 been used so often that it legally loses its 00:35:41.579 --> 00:35:44.420 religious meaning, isn't that inherently offensive 00:35:44.420 --> 00:35:46.760 to the religion it references? It is a massive 00:35:46.760 --> 00:35:48.820 point of contention. Right. It's basically arguing 00:35:48.820 --> 00:35:51.079 that the phrase doesn't really mean God in a 00:35:50.960 --> 00:35:53.360 holy sense anymore. It's just a patriotic slogan 00:35:53.360 --> 00:35:55.739 like just do it. I can imagine that argument 00:35:55.739 --> 00:35:58.559 absolutely infuriates the atheists who want it 00:35:58.559 --> 00:36:01.539 removed and deeply offends the religious people 00:36:01.539 --> 00:36:04.099 who want the motto to maintain its holy significance. 00:36:04.559 --> 00:36:06.719 It seems like a massive legal paradox. It is 00:36:06.719 --> 00:36:09.079 an absolute paradox and legal scholars debate 00:36:09.079 --> 00:36:11.619 it constantly. It essentially saves the motto 00:36:11.619 --> 00:36:14.630 by legally draining it of its sacred power. But 00:36:14.630 --> 00:36:16.889 regardless the philosophical paradox, it has 00:36:16.889 --> 00:36:19.590 been highly effective in the courts. Let's walk 00:36:19.590 --> 00:36:21.429 through the legal timeline of how this defense 00:36:21.429 --> 00:36:23.969 has been applied. The intense, moderate anxiety 00:36:23.969 --> 00:36:28.090 over the motto really began in 1962 with a landmark 00:36:28.090 --> 00:36:31.769 Supreme Court case called Engel v. Vital. In 00:36:31.769 --> 00:36:33.670 that case, the Supreme Court struck down a New 00:36:33.670 --> 00:36:35.849 York law that encouraged public schools to recite 00:36:35.849 --> 00:36:38.690 a government -offered prayer. The court ruled 00:36:38.690 --> 00:36:41.110 definitively that public school prayer violated 00:36:41.110 --> 00:36:43.429 the First Amendment. I imagine the public reaction 00:36:43.429 --> 00:36:46.289 to banning school prayer in 1962 was explosive. 00:36:46.610 --> 00:36:48.710 It was an absolute panic. According to polling 00:36:48.710 --> 00:36:51.730 from the era nearly 80 percent of Americans disapproved 00:36:51.730 --> 00:36:54.639 of the ruling. Congress went into a frenzy. They 00:36:54.639 --> 00:36:56.659 were terrified that if school prayer was deemed 00:36:56.659 --> 00:36:59.480 unconstitutional, then in God we trust on the 00:36:59.480 --> 00:37:01.840 currency would be the Supreme Court's very next 00:37:01.840 --> 00:37:05.300 target. The domino effect. Exactly. Senator Sam 00:37:05.300 --> 00:37:07.519 Ervin from North Carolina famously wondered if 00:37:07.519 --> 00:37:09.780 God himself had been declared unconstitutional. 00:37:10.239 --> 00:37:12.300 Some congressmen even tried to pass bills to 00:37:12.300 --> 00:37:14.719 buy Bibles for the Supreme Court justices to 00:37:14.719 --> 00:37:16.739 remind them of their faith. Did Congress take 00:37:16.739 --> 00:37:19.400 any preemptive action to protect the motto? They 00:37:19.400 --> 00:37:22.400 did. In direct physical retaliation to the court's 00:37:22.400 --> 00:37:26.000 ruling, in December 1962, Congress ordered the 00:37:26.000 --> 00:37:28.920 motto to be carved in massive letters directly 00:37:28.920 --> 00:37:31.179 above the rostrum of the Speaker of the House 00:37:31.179 --> 00:37:33.500 of Representatives. Wow, just carved right into 00:37:33.500 --> 00:37:36.760 the stone. It was a literal stone wall of descience, 00:37:37.039 --> 00:37:39.500 daring the courts to challenge it. And the legal 00:37:39.500 --> 00:37:41.599 challenges from the public did inevitably come. 00:37:42.119 --> 00:37:45.079 In 1970, we see the first major appellate case 00:37:45.079 --> 00:37:47.960 challenging the motto on currency, Arenal v. 00:37:47.960 --> 00:37:50.400 United States. And how did the court rule in 00:37:50.400 --> 00:37:52.420 error now? The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 00:37:52.420 --> 00:37:54.219 ruled against the plaintiff, relying heavily 00:37:54.219 --> 00:37:57.079 on the concept of ceremonial deism, even before 00:37:57.079 --> 00:37:59.599 Brennan formally coined the term. They stated 00:37:59.599 --> 00:38:02.980 that the motto's use is of patriotic or ceremonial 00:38:02.980 --> 00:38:05.800 character and bears no true resemblance to a 00:38:05.800 --> 00:38:08.019 governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise. 00:38:08.079 --> 00:38:10.659 OK. This exact logic was affirmed again in the 00:38:10.659 --> 00:38:13.659 1970s by the Fifth Circuit and again in the 1990s 00:38:13.659 --> 00:38:15.639 by the Tenth Circuit. It seems like every time 00:38:15.639 --> 00:38:18.889 someone sues, the courts just copy pace the ceremonial 00:38:18.889 --> 00:38:20.949 deism argument. I remember hearing about a guy 00:38:20.949 --> 00:38:23.750 in the 2000s who made a career out of suing over 00:38:23.750 --> 00:38:27.159 this, Michael Newdow. Yes, Michael Newdow. He 00:38:27.159 --> 00:38:30.119 is a physician and an attorney who launched a 00:38:30.119 --> 00:38:32.360 relentless crusade against government religious 00:38:32.360 --> 00:38:36.139 phrases. He previously sued, famously, to get 00:38:36.139 --> 00:38:38.820 the phrase, under God, removed from the Pledge 00:38:38.820 --> 00:38:40.960 of Allegiance. Right, I remember that. Backed 00:38:40.960 --> 00:38:43.360 by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Newdow 00:38:43.360 --> 00:38:45.699 filed multiple lawsuits across different federal 00:38:45.699 --> 00:38:47.980 circuits trying to get the motto off the currency. 00:38:48.599 --> 00:38:52.199 He sued in California in 2006, New York in 2013, 00:38:52.659 --> 00:38:56.179 and Ohio in 2016. Every single time the federal 00:38:56.179 --> 00:38:58.599 courts shut him down, repeating the precedent 00:38:58.599 --> 00:39:01.639 that the motto has no theological or ritualistic 00:39:01.639 --> 00:39:04.139 impact. Have the courts ever compared it to other 00:39:04.139 --> 00:39:07.199 religious phrases in government, like beyond 00:39:07.199 --> 00:39:09.760 just the pledge? Yes, a fascinating comparison 00:39:09.760 --> 00:39:12.780 came up in a 2015 New Jersey state court ruling. 00:39:13.340 --> 00:39:15.699 A judge named David F. Bauman was dealing with 00:39:15.699 --> 00:39:17.719 a lawsuit about the Pledge of Allegiance, and 00:39:17.719 --> 00:39:20.239 he wrote that expunging under God from the national 00:39:20.239 --> 00:39:22.440 consciousness would be just as impossible as 00:39:22.440 --> 00:39:25.389 expunging in God. we trust from every coin. Which 00:39:25.389 --> 00:39:27.909 is pretty much impossible at this point. Or removing 00:39:27.909 --> 00:39:30.070 the phrase, so help me God, from the presidential 00:39:30.070 --> 00:39:32.730 oath of office. Or stopping the Supreme Court 00:39:32.730 --> 00:39:35.250 from opening with, God save the United States 00:39:35.250 --> 00:39:38.309 and this honorable court. The judiciary views 00:39:38.309 --> 00:39:41.389 these phrases as an inextricably entrenched part 00:39:41.389 --> 00:39:44.409 of the American fabric. Interestingly, the Supreme 00:39:44.409 --> 00:39:47.329 Court itself has actually never ruled directly 00:39:47.329 --> 00:39:49.730 on the merits of the motto's constitutionality. 00:39:49.829 --> 00:39:52.230 Wait, really? The Supreme Court has never taken 00:39:52.230 --> 00:39:55.269 it up. Nope. They've repeatedly denied certain 00:39:55.269 --> 00:39:58.309 meaning. They refuse to hear appeals on all these 00:39:58.309 --> 00:40:01.289 lower court cases, effectively letting the ceremonial 00:40:01.289 --> 00:40:04.190 deism defense stand. Is there any exception? 00:40:04.449 --> 00:40:06.570 If the courts are universally protecting the 00:40:06.570 --> 00:40:08.809 motto on currency and buildings, what happened 00:40:08.809 --> 00:40:10.590 at the license plates? You mentioned Mississippi 00:40:10.590 --> 00:40:14.130 earlier. Yes. There is one major legal vulnerability 00:40:14.130 --> 00:40:16.409 for the motto and it hinges on the concept of 00:40:16.409 --> 00:40:19.230 compelled speech. Compelled speech. OK. While 00:40:19.230 --> 00:40:21.369 the courts consistently rule that the government 00:40:21.369 --> 00:40:23.969 can print the motto on its own currency and carve 00:40:23.969 --> 00:40:26.409 it into its own buildings, the government cannot 00:40:26.409 --> 00:40:29.389 force you as a private citizen to display it 00:40:29.389 --> 00:40:32.139 on your private property. This legal precedent 00:40:32.139 --> 00:40:35.219 goes all the way back to a 1977 Supreme Court 00:40:35.219 --> 00:40:37.760 case called Woolley v. Maynard. What happened 00:40:37.760 --> 00:40:40.039 in Woolley v. Maynard? New Hampshire tried to 00:40:40.039 --> 00:40:42.139 force its citizens to carry the state motto, 00:40:42.480 --> 00:40:45.059 live free or die, on their standard license plates. 00:40:45.699 --> 00:40:48.179 A Jehovah's Witness objected to the phase and 00:40:48.179 --> 00:40:50.440 covered it up, and he was repeatedly arrested. 00:40:50.730 --> 00:40:53.650 For covering up the motto? Yes. The Supreme Court 00:40:53.650 --> 00:40:56.010 eventually struck down the state's actions, ruling 00:40:56.010 --> 00:40:58.389 that a state cannot force a citizen to use their 00:40:58.389 --> 00:41:01.469 private property as a mobile billboard for the 00:41:01.469 --> 00:41:04.650 state's ideological message. Ah, the mobile billboard. 00:41:04.860 --> 00:41:07.440 exception. So if a coin is government property, 00:41:07.519 --> 00:41:09.780 but my car is my private property, the state 00:41:09.780 --> 00:41:12.500 can't make me advertise their religious or ideological 00:41:12.500 --> 00:41:15.980 slogan. Precisely. And that exact 1977 precedent 00:41:15.980 --> 00:41:18.360 is why a federal judge in Mississippi ruled in 00:41:18.360 --> 00:41:21.199 2023 that the state could not force drivers to 00:41:21.199 --> 00:41:24.199 display in God we trust on their standard default 00:41:24.199 --> 00:41:27.420 license plates. So they won. Yes. The judge ruled 00:41:27.420 --> 00:41:29.659 that if someone objects, they cannot be compelled 00:41:29.659 --> 00:41:32.300 to advertise the message, regardless of whether 00:41:32.300 --> 00:41:35.369 it's considered ceremonial deism. Mississippi 00:41:35.369 --> 00:41:38.010 ended up running a design contest for a new standard 00:41:38.010 --> 00:41:40.769 plate without the motto, and the atheist plaintiffs 00:41:40.769 --> 00:41:42.849 subsequently brought their lawsuit in May of 00:41:42.849 --> 00:41:46.489 2023. So the courts draw a very specific bright 00:41:46.489 --> 00:41:49.030 line between government speech on government 00:41:49.030 --> 00:41:51.949 property and compelled speech on private property. 00:41:52.210 --> 00:41:54.230 I am curious about where the public stands on 00:41:54.230 --> 00:41:56.530 all this today. After 160 years of this debate, 00:41:56.670 --> 00:41:58.590 where does the culture sit? Are we still fighting 00:41:58.590 --> 00:42:00.530 about this at the kitchen table? The polling 00:42:00.530 --> 00:42:02.889 data is highly revealing about both the durability 00:42:02.889 --> 00:42:04.949 of the motto and where the culture might be heading. 00:42:05.510 --> 00:42:09.050 Back in 2003, a joint poll by USA Today, CNN 00:42:09.050 --> 00:42:11.590 and Gallup found that 90 percent of Americans 00:42:11.590 --> 00:42:14.269 supported the inscription on U .S. coins. 90 00:42:14.269 --> 00:42:16.710 percent. That is near universal consensus, which 00:42:16.710 --> 00:42:19.010 is a rarity in American polling. It really is. 00:42:18.989 --> 00:42:22.130 And even more recently, a 2024 Real Clear Politics 00:42:22.130 --> 00:42:25.190 poll showed that only 17 % of Americans explicitly 00:42:25.190 --> 00:42:27.730 want the motto removed from the currency. 17 00:42:27.730 --> 00:42:31.070 % is remarkably low, considering how intensely 00:42:31.070 --> 00:42:33.469 this is debated in the courts. But I imagine 00:42:33.469 --> 00:42:35.630 there's a generational divide hiding in those 00:42:35.630 --> 00:42:37.710 numbers. There is a deep and growing divide. 00:42:38.489 --> 00:42:40.590 We must add a layer of nuance to those broad 00:42:40.590 --> 00:42:43.269 numbers because generational and political splits 00:42:43.269 --> 00:42:47.179 are actively widening. A 2019 poll of college 00:42:47.179 --> 00:42:50.559 students by College Pulse revealed a stark partisan 00:42:50.559 --> 00:42:53.340 divide. What did it show? Only just over half 00:42:53.340 --> 00:42:55.639 of the college students polled supported the 00:42:55.639 --> 00:42:57.619 inclusion of the national motto on currency. 00:42:58.300 --> 00:43:00.559 Among those who identified as Democrats, two 00:43:00.559 --> 00:43:03.960 -thirds opposed the motto, while 94 % of Republican 00:43:03.960 --> 00:43:06.440 students favored it. Wow. So it's totally split 00:43:06.440 --> 00:43:08.260 down party lines for the younger generation. 00:43:08.500 --> 00:43:11.639 Exactly. So while the broader, older public still 00:43:11.639 --> 00:43:14.219 largely supports the motto, the younger generation 00:43:14.219 --> 00:43:16.860 views it through a highly polarized partisan 00:43:16.860 --> 00:43:19.159 lens. Let's bring this all together. It is truly 00:43:19.159 --> 00:43:21.320 incredible to marvel at the journey of these 00:43:21.320 --> 00:43:23.159 four words. It's quite a journey. We started 00:43:23.159 --> 00:43:25.739 with a phrase born in an obscure 18th century 00:43:25.739 --> 00:43:28.460 Pennsylvania militia flag adapted from an English 00:43:28.460 --> 00:43:31.440 hymnal. It was popularized as a desperate morale 00:43:31.440 --> 00:43:33.780 booster during the theological crisis of the 00:43:33.780 --> 00:43:37.460 Civil War. a literal presidential protest from 00:43:37.460 --> 00:43:39.960 Teddy Roosevelt, who thought it was sacrilegious. 00:43:40.320 --> 00:43:43.679 Right. It got supercharged by Cold War anti -communism 00:43:43.679 --> 00:43:46.880 and corporate lobbying in the 1950s. And it has 00:43:46.880 --> 00:43:49.460 endured endless legal battles, relying on the 00:43:49.460 --> 00:43:52.599 paradox of ceremonial deism to become an absolute 00:43:52.599 --> 00:43:55.900 cornerstone of American civil religion. And that 00:43:55.900 --> 00:43:58.400 term civil religion... perfectly encapsulates 00:43:58.400 --> 00:44:02.079 what this is. It is a complex fusion of national 00:44:02.079 --> 00:44:06.949 identity, historical To you, our listener, I 00:44:06.949 --> 00:44:09.170 want to emphasize that every single time you 00:44:09.170 --> 00:44:11.750 hand over a physical piece of cash or flip a 00:44:11.750 --> 00:44:14.409 quarter, you are not just making a mundane financial 00:44:14.409 --> 00:44:17.150 transaction. You're not. You are physically participating 00:44:17.150 --> 00:44:20.889 in a 160 -year -old ongoing debate about the 00:44:20.889 --> 00:44:22.829 fundamental soul and character of the United 00:44:22.829 --> 00:44:24.909 States. You are literally holding history in 00:44:24.909 --> 00:44:26.849 your hand. Holding history in your hand. But 00:44:26.849 --> 00:44:29.050 I want to leave you with one final provocative 00:44:29.050 --> 00:44:31.590 thought to mull over on your own. Something that 00:44:31.590 --> 00:44:33.809 builds on everything we've explored today, but 00:44:33.809 --> 00:44:35.690 pushes it into the near future. OK, let's hear 00:44:35.690 --> 00:44:38.550 it. We are rapidly moving toward an increasingly 00:44:38.550 --> 00:44:41.670 cashless society. We are paying with credit cards, 00:44:41.969 --> 00:44:45.929 Apple Pay, Venmo, cryptocurrency. Physical coins 00:44:45.929 --> 00:44:48.510 and paper bills are slowly disappearing from 00:44:48.510 --> 00:44:52.510 our daily secular commerce. So if paper currency 00:44:52.510 --> 00:44:55.110 and metal coins become completely obsolete in 00:44:55.110 --> 00:44:57.829 the next few decades, what happens to the ultimate 00:44:57.829 --> 00:45:00.460 billboard for the national motto? That is a great 00:45:00.460 --> 00:45:02.980 question. Right. If the physical money disappears, 00:45:03.340 --> 00:45:06.340 where does In God We Trust go next? Does it move 00:45:06.340 --> 00:45:08.980 into the digital code of a central bank digital 00:45:08.980 --> 00:45:11.860 currency? Or does it simply fade away as the 00:45:11.860 --> 00:45:13.699 physical cash does? It's something to chew on 00:45:13.699 --> 00:45:15.460 the next time you tap your phone to pay for a 00:45:15.460 --> 00:45:17.860 coffee. It is a profound question about the intersection 00:45:17.860 --> 00:45:21.219 of modern technology, historical tradition, and 00:45:21.219 --> 00:45:23.840 constitutional law. It really is. Thank you so 00:45:23.840 --> 00:45:25.800 much for joining us on this deep dive into the 00:45:25.800 --> 00:45:27.579 history of our money and our national motto. 00:45:28.000 --> 00:45:30.099 We hope you enjoy the facts, the stories, and 00:45:30.099 --> 00:45:32.300 the impartial look at the history. We invite 00:45:32.300 --> 00:45:34.860 you to explore your own sources, pull out a dollar 00:45:34.860 --> 00:45:36.780 bill, and look at it with fresh eyes and keep 00:45:36.780 --> 00:45:39.019 asking those great questions. Until next time.