William Penn’s Charter of Liberties—one of our Constitution’s ancestors
The Charter of Liberties and Frame of Government granted by William Penn to his colony on May 5, 1682 . . . was . . . a true colonial constitution.
First decision of the Supreme Court Term: a unanimous liberal result
The statute is based on an overly-expansive definition of congressional power . . . But no member of the court wrote a concurring opinion to point that out . . .
This Supreme Court term will show that there is no 5-4 “conservative majority”
The more traditional justices differ significantly in their legal methods and often reach liberal results.
About birthright citizenship
Claims on both sides that the Constitution or case precedent clearly answer this question are not accurate.
Yet another constitutional precedent: a colonial charter from New York
The Charter foreshadowed important provisions in the Bill of Rights.
The Pilgrim Code of Law: one of many sources of our American Constitution
In fact, the Constitution was the product of centuries of “guidelines.”
A spash of cold water: Kavanaugh probably won’t change much, but there are other options
This article first appeared in Townhall.com. When Senator Susan Collins made her now-famous speech stating she would vote to approve the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, a keystone of her argument amounted to, “He won’t change much.” She noted Judge Kavanaugh’s dedication to case precedent. She also noted that while the national […]
Journal now available from the latest Convention of States!
Nineteen states attended, making it the second-largest convention of states in American history by number of states represented.
Hopes of using 25th Amendment against Trump are delusional
Trump-haters . . . should fix their hopes on impeachment, not on the 25th Amendment. For impeachment, though, you need a proven crime or a real breach of fiduciary duty. . . . Blind hatred and unproved allegations don’t count.
“Progressives” challenging U.S. Constitution’s adoption should look in their own backyard
State constitutions written or favored by “progressives” also have been proclaimed under dubious circumstances.
New case shows the Supreme Court’s defense of constitutional federalism is only tepid
. . . Those who adopted the Constitution understood that governance of recreational activities, such as sports, was reserved to the states. Regulation of in-state gambling, like other moral issues, similarly was outside the federal sphere.
Are recent “rescissions” of Article V applications valid?
“The preambles of seven of the nine rescissions show they were based on material mistakes of law and fact.
