Author: Rob Natelson

Rob Natelson is the Independence Institute’s Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence and heads the Institute’s Article V Information Center. He was a law professor for 25 years, serving at three different universities. Among other subjects, he taught Constitutional Law, Constitutional History, Advanced Constitutional Law, and First Amendment. He is also the Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Montana Policy Institute. Rob is especially known for his studies of the Constitution’s original meaning. His research has carried him to libraries throughout the United States and in Britain, including four months at Oxford. The results have included several break-though discoveries. Click here for more information about Rob

First In a Series: John Dickinson Comes Into Prominence

This year marks the 250th anniversary of one of the most influential series of writings in American history.

Rights for a River? An Effort to Undermine Democracy and Make the Law Unfair

The unstated goal is to change the balance of power among humans—and to undermine democracy and the rule of law.

John Dickinson’s ‘Farmer’ Letters on Their 250th Anniversary

The Farmer letters went well beyond asserting the case against taxation without representation; they also helped clarify American constitutional thinking on other questions, including: Which government responsibilities should be exercised centrally and which locally?

Why removing historical monuments is a bad idea

[B]ecause almost everyone conforms in most respects to prevailing social practices, disqualification for such conduct is necessarily arbitrary and driven more by politics than by merit.

State protection for citizen rights should temper ‘local control’

So when is local control good in reality rather than merely as a slogan?

A Response to a “Living Constitutionalist”

. . . law professors often corrupt their understanding of the Constitution with their own political preferences. . .

How a ‘convention of states’ could tweak the Constitution

Representatives of state legislatures from across the nation will converge in Phoenix, Arizona on Sept. 12 to participate in a traditional American institution called a “convention of states.” Conventions of states are valuable. They help ensure Washington, DC doesn’t dictate all decisions on every subject. The purpose of the meeting in Phoenix is to plan […]

Part II: What Can We Do About Legal Realism and Its Promotion of Judicial Activism?

. . . the problem centers in specific institutions: American law schools and the higher reaches of the judiciary.

Part I: Judicial activism: Here’s a core reason for it you’ve never heard about

The Founders erected the American legal system to operate in the context of Anglo-American judicial values. The rules placed expressly or implicitly in the Constitution . . . were designed to operate in that context. However, the context changed.

Drafting a Balanced Budget Amendment: It’s tougher than you might think

Of course, it is one thing to criticize, but another to try to craft something better.

If you want to win a Supreme Court case, it helps to play to “progressive” values

Observe how many of the Left’s ideological buttons the plaintiff’s lawyers pushed: non-profit, recycling, mandatory government fee, poverty, disabilities, environment—and that interminably-overused mantra: community.

With due respect to the Supreme Court, some campaign finance laws are unconstitutional

But Citizens United included a second decision, one rarely mentioned. In this part of the case, the court upheld federal laws requiring contributors to political ads to publicly reveal their names. Unlike the first ruling, the second was a constitutional mistake. Although the court has since reaffirmed its position, it should promptly reconsider.