728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90

Signing_of_Constitution_Chandler_Christy_smThe Constitutional Studies Center combines careful, objective scholarship into the original understanding of the Constitution with advocacy for human freedom under law. It produces books, issue papers, articles, and legal briefs reporting the results of its research. Since 2010, the Center has had enormous influence on constitutional law cases and commentary, but also on policy makers and grass roots activists. For example, the Center’s research findings galvanized the massive and growing “Article V” movement to restore constitutional limits on the federal government.

Latest Posts

  • A Correction They Didn’t Print: The Denver Post and Judge Bork0

    • January 2, 2013

    A Denver Post article on the passing of Judge Robert Bork (Dec. 20) says, “He advocated a view of judging known as ‘strict constructionism’ or ‘originalism.’”Actually, the writer was confused. Those two terms have very different meanings. An originalist believes the Constitution, like other legal documents, should be construed as understood by the people who

  • It’s (not quite) a Riot! How the Constitution’s language differs0

    • December 26, 2012

    “. . . it opens a door to the appointment of a swarm of revenue and excise officers to prey upon the honest and industrious part of the community, eat up their substance, and riot on the spoils of the country.” – Judge Robert Yates, New York delegate to the Constitutional Convention (warning in Dec.

  • Constitutionally, Speaker Boehner Should Not Be Making Pre-emptive Tax Concessions0

    • December 23, 2012

    From the standpoint of one familiar with our constitutional history, the spectacle of the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives making pre-emptive tax concessions to the President is unnerving. Over a period of centuries, the lower house of the English Parliament, the House of Commons, fought for and won the “power of the purse”—that

  • Do States Have a Right to Secede?0

    • December 12, 2012

    The news that thousands of people have signed a petition for their own states to secede from the union has raised this issue once again. We’ll leave to another time the suspicion-inducing question of why so much attention is focused on the most extreme remedy for federal overreaching when the Framers’ own perfectly constitutional remedy

  • Why States Must Shun the Obamacare Medicaid Expansion0

    • December 6, 2012

    During the Obamacare case before the Supreme Court, the Independence Institute argued that the law’s provisions forcing the states to expand Medicaid were unconstitutional. Neither the Constitution nor case law, we pointed out, permits the federal government to use federal spending programs to coerce the states. Seven of the nine justices agreed with us, essentially

  • Bans on Political Party Endorsements of Judges Held Invalid0

    • November 29, 2012

    A federal appeals court has struck down a Montana law forbidding political parties from endorsing candidates in non-partisan judicial elections. The court order does not affect the system by which candidates for judgeships run without party designation. But it does affirm the right of political parties to speak their minds about those candidates. Non-partisan elections


Get the latest edition of the popular work, The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant. You can buy it in either hard copy or Kindle form here.


Rob Natelson, Senior Fellow, Constitutional Jurisprudence
Email: rob.natelson1@gmail.com
Phone: 303-279-6536, ext 114