Impeachment: What did the Founders mean by “High Misdemeanors?”
A president . . . is subject to impeachment and removal for dishonesty, disloyalty, negligence, and the like. But he is not impeachable merely for mistakes in policy or reasonable disagreements over interpretation of the law.
The Founders’ promises about what the Federal Government could NOT do
Functions outside the federal sphere were to include “social services, education, criminal law, civil justice, land use, and others.”
The U.S. Post Office: the Constitution’s odd nod to socialism
What does the Postal Power tell us about congressional delegation to administrative agencies?
New information on the Constitution’s ratification — Part III: Vermont
New Hampshire was, and is, quite a small state, but its ratification was particularly significant.
New information on the Constitution’s ratification — Part II: New Hampshire
New Hampshire was, and is, quite a small state, but its ratification was particularly significant.
New information on the Constitution’s ratification — Part I: South Carolina
. . . if you want to apply the Founders’ own rules of interpretation to the Constitution, the understanding of the ratifiers is most important.
Is Federal Infrastructure Spending Unconstitutional?
So what was the understanding in 1787-90? I have pieced this together over many years. In a nutshell, here it is:
New Article: The President is Not Violating the Foreign Emoluments Clause
The study indirectly absolves President Trump of claims that he is violating the Constitution by receiving profits from enterprises whose customers include foreign governments.
It seems this blog was right about natural born citizenship all along
A new study confirms this blog’s conclusions in all important details.
The Poetry in the Constitution’s Preamble
Morris’ approach was unique and has served as an inspiration for constitution-makers ever since.
Where the Constitution’s Word “Convention” Came From
Fortunately, by the time the Constitution was written, this verbal confusion had been pretty much been sorted out.
II Senior Fellow Natelson’s Research Again Relied on by a Supreme Court Justice
Rob’s research, published in the 2008 article, showed convincingly that Justice Thomas was right to be skeptical.
