The Supreme Court’s Trademark Case and the First Amendment: Carrying History Too Far
- June 30, 2024
[S]etting minimum consumption ages is not a power the Constitution grants the federal government. The Constitution reserves it to the states.
READ MOREIn the 20th century, the Supreme Court cited McCulloch to uphold unprecedented federal spending and regulatory programs. Law school constitutional law courses sometimes treat McCulloch the same way. . . . [But] this approach is the product of historical ignorance.
READ MOREToday the constitutions of 26 states contain bans that go well beyond what Blaine wanted. Unlike Blaine’s proposal, those constitutions mandate discrimination against “sectarian” religion.
READ MORE“Progressive” Supreme Court decisions that led directly or indirectly to the orgy of anonymous spending
READ MOREBy the time ratification was complete, the Constitution’s implications for religion were understood: Religious faith was valuable for good government. But government was to treat individual religions equally, as long as they conducted themselves in an orderly manner.
READ MOREBy clarifying constitutional amendment law, Stevens made it more accessible to citizens who now seek to use it to cure our dysfunctional federal government.
READ MORE