Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton recently defended the property rights of Williamson County property owner John Yearwood. Yearwood’s property is home to the Bone Cave Harvestman, a spider that lives in only two Texas counties. Because the spider is protected by the Endangered Species Act, Yearwood’s use of his property is severely restricted.
Paxton is correct to defend Yearwood. That is not what is interesting or even noteworthy about this story covering the topic. The story concludes:
For such localized species, it is the state and county, not the federal government, which can best address conservation.
In other words, there is nothing wrong with sacrificing property rights to protect a spider, so long as it is done by the state or county government. We don’t want Washington violating our property rights, but it’s okay if Austin does. It is this kind of unprincipled “defense” of property rights that invites their violation.
The advocates of this position hold the position that local communities know what is best for the citizens. Thus, if the local residents want to ban plastic bags, protect old trees, mandate recycling, or protect obscure arachnids, they should be allowed.
But it matters little if the lives of individuals are controlled from Washington, Austin, or the county seat. It matters little if the lives of individuals are controlled by a vote of legislators or a vote of the citizens. If one’s life is controlled by others, then one’s life is not free. This is true whether the others are bureaucrats in Washington or a democratic majority in one’s community.
Rights are not subject to a vote. They are unalienable. The proper purpose of government is the protection of our rights, and that often means rejecting the “will of the people.”