New scholarly article explains amendments conventions
The new article “marshals a massive amount of historical evidence to show that a convention for proposing amendments is simply a ‘convention of the states,’ a frequent kind of gathering in U.S. history, and one whose make-up and procedures is well known.
Underselling Originalism
Originalism is not a modern invention “[T]he ‘intent of the makers’ had been the lodestar of documentary construction since at least the 1500s.”
Global warming and the Constitution’s amendment process: How to tell whether a ‘consensus’ Is true
How academics formed a completely erroneous “consensus” about the convention procedure of Article V.
Two new briefs in the Supreme Court’s Electoral College case
[The integrity of presidential electors] has taken on great urgency as “progressive” state legislatures increasingly meddle with free elections.
New article: 18th century law shows impeachment requires a crime
Examples of high misdemeanors . . . were bribery, assault, and attempted murder.
The English tradition of liberty under law is a gift to us all
Britain was the first major country in world history to abolish slavery.
The new ERA campaign: constitutional malware
The incentives behind the campaign are obvious. The ERA is poorly drafted and vague (which is why it was rejected). If it became part of the Constitution, the result would be legal chaos. Activists know they would be able to feed off that chaos . . . .
The Mayflower Compact and “consent of the governed” are now 400 years old
Self-government is at the heart of the American experiment. Historically, it is far more important than some other institutions (such as slavery) that [receive] more attention . . . . .
How much power may Congress delegate to federal agencies?
[T]he search for a single “non-delegation” principle applicable to all congressional powers is a futile one. Instead, the scope of permissible delegation of any particular congressional power must be sought in the meaning of the words describing that power.
Rob Natelson’s Comment on Jon Caldara and the Denver Post
Newsflash for woke “journalists:” Conservatives and libertarians, like others, are entitled speak in their own voices. Not in yours or anyone else’s.
Will the Supreme Court strike down bigoted state constitutional rules?
[T]he history of anti-sectarian clauses shows that “sectarian” is not a synonym for “religious” and anti-sectarian clauses were not designed merely to discriminate against religion. Instead, they were designed to discriminate in favor of some religions and against others.
Where were all the Constitution’s defenders when the feds raised the smoking age?
[S]etting minimum consumption ages is not a power the Constitution grants the federal government. The Constitution reserves it to the states.
