Defending the Constitution from the ‘living constitutionalists’
“In practice, “living constitutionalism” converts our Constitution into a parchment loin cloth to cover political pudenda.”
Defending the Constitution: The Framers did not violate their trust
The overwhelming majority of the framers had been given full authority to propose a new government. Charges that they did not are based on ignorance.
Defending the Constitution: The ‘Three-Fifths Compromise’ was not based on racism
If you assume that counting persons is the proper basis for congressional representation, it’s easy to see how one could misread the reduction for slaves and the exclusion of non-tax-paying Indians as expressions of racism. However, many, probably most, of the framers did not think counting persons was the proper basis for representation.
How states should push back against the Biden administration
States can refuse to cooperate with a federal program or enforce an unconstitutional federal law.
The Founders warned us about abuses like H.R. 1
Based on the Constitution’s text and history, Congress’s power to regulate its own elections should be narrowly construed.
How a ‘Convention of States’ really works
Frantic claims that it’s a “constitutional convention” … or that it can issue a new document or “radically re-write” the existing one … or change the ratification procedure—none of these have any legal or historical basis.
When Can an Originalist Scholar Begin with the Constitution’s Text?
Sometimes after examining the text it even remains unclear whether that text is unclear! What seems obvious on initial examination may be entirely wrong.
Can Trump be disqualified from the presidency?
Congress cannot disqualify Trump from serving as president again.
Originalism: the constitutionality of impeaching ex-presidents
The Constitution’s language creates an evidentiary presumption against late impeachment . . . but it might be rebutted.
The impeachment videos: Raskin’s questionable tactics
The doctored anti-Trump videos did not meet any reasonable standard of admissibility.
Prosecutors tried to make opinions impeachable
In an impeachment trial, if the House managers claim that the accused’s alleged lies form a basis for conviction, then they have the burden of proving—by clear and convincing evidence—that the statements were, in fact, lies.
The unfair procedures in the Trump impeachment
To ensure fairness, the prosecuting House managers must demonstrate decisively (1) that the election was fair, (2) that Trump had no reasonable grounds for believing otherwise, and (3) that he had a corrupt motive for lying.
