The Cult of Advocacy: Comments on the State of Legal Scholarship—With Examples from Professor Ablavsky’s Latest Response
Many writings by law professors merely serve a political agenda and do not meet the minimal qualifications for real scholarship
Defending the Constitution: Why the Framers Thought Ratification by Only Nine States Was Sufficient
Why nine? Because any combination of nine states (even the nine with the smallest populations) would comprise a majority of American citizens.
Understanding the Constitution: Originalism was not invented by partisan Republicans
In constitutional law, the methods applied by “progressives” are the new, partisan inventions. Originalism is the standard bequeathed by the ages.
Will the Supreme Court stretch the Commerce Clause even more?
Some claim that when the word “Commerce” is applied to Native Americans, it magically balloons in scope, allowing Congress to regulate just about anything.
Understanding the Constitution: The Power to Restrict Immigration
The Constitution gives Congress power to “define and punish” offenses against the law of nations. Scholars popular among the Founders wrote that illegal immigration is such an offense.
Governor DeSantis, the raid on Trump, and the rule of law—Part II
DeSantis has just helped educate us on the rule of law. For that he deserves our gratitude.
Understanding the Constitution: Why it doesn’t protect the unborn
As Justice Samuel Alito pointed out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health (pdf)—and as the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia said repeatedly—the Fifth and 14th Amendment Due Process Clauses really have nothing to do with abortion.
Understanding the Constitution: The Great Forgetting
All of these false assertions emerged from a historical process—primarily during the 19th century—that I’ve labeled “The Great Forgetting.”
Would a federal Law legalizing abortion survive the Supreme Court?
For the court to strike down a federal abortion law, it would have to . . . courageously enforce the Constitution’s subject-matter boundaries between federal and state jurisdiction.
The Constitution’s rules for relations with Indian tribes: part II
The leading myth in Indian law is that the Constitution gives Congress “plenary” (absolute) authority over Indian affairs.
The new Supreme Court: not conservative, but no longer liberal
The court’s decisions upholding state vax mandates gave us a hint that it was about to overturn Roe.
The deeper significance of Justice Thomas’s 2nd amendment opinion
Justice Thomas’s opinion affirms that the scope of the right to keep and bear arms is fixed by the words of the amendment. The law is reflected in those words, not in some judge’s idea of what is important.
