As Trump's trade wars demonstrate, giving the president unilateral authority to impose tariffs is both dangerous and unconstitutional. Getting rid of it is likely to require a combination of litigation and political mobilization.
Again and again, the president tried to interfere with the Mueller investigation in a roundabout way.
Pending restrictions on vaping products in Michigan and New York are based on an alarmingly broad understanding of the executive branch's "public health" authority.
The presidential contender conspicuously fails to explain the legal basis for her plan to impose new restrictions by executive fiat.
The Democratic presidential field is not interested in your puny restraints on the executive branch.
Hopefully the White House can refrain from creating any new constitutional conundrums for a semester.
The strongest critics of unilateral decisions to attack other countries include Tulsi Gabbard and Bernie Sanders, while Joe Biden thinks anything goes.
Sen. Chuck Grassley and the Senate Finance Committee will debate two bills this fall aimed at restricting presidential authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval.
Even if Trump doesn’t follow through on his bad ideas, the uncertainty is still a drag.
Obama denied him clemency. Will Trump set him free?
While the president's mercy might be self-serving, it's not necessarily wrong.
In a testy exchange about immigration, the former vice president argued that Trump alone was the problem.
“It should have been easy for the Court to say goodbye to Auer.”
The ruling upholds a trial court decision holding that the president cannot divert military funds to builds his proposed border wall.
The senator and the president she wants to unseat are determined to have their way, regardless of what the law says.
The decisions expand on the same judge's earlier preliminary ruling holding that the president cannot reallocate military funds to build his border wall.
At the second Democratic debate, the presidential hopeful showed her affinity for executive action.
Today's ruling in Gundy v. United States allows Congress to delegate to the executive broad power to create new criminal offenses. But there is hope the Court might reconsider Gundy in the future.
The artist wanted students to learn about Washington's flaws. How traumatizing.
India, unlike America, lacks checks against the designs of a populist authoritarian.
In a new report, the Treasury Department declares it will begin scrutinizing any nation that runs a bilateral trade imbalance of more than $40 billion with the United States
The United States is currently operating under 32 different national emergencies. This proposal would require Congress approve those declarations within 72 hours, and again after 90 days.
A letter signed by a wide range of scholars with different political and jurisprudential views urges Congress to sue to end illegal US involvement in the Yemen conflict.
Jamelle Bouie's counterintuitive recommendation would effectively eliminate constitutional limits on elected officials, including Trump and every demagogue who follows him.
The decision does not reach the merits of President Trump's attempt to divert military funds to build his border wall.
Free market reformers and authoritarian nationalists battle it out to reshape Brazil.
The symposium includes contributions by 16 legal commentators, including VC bloggers Keith Whittington and myself.
The first court decision on Trump's plan to reallocate federal funds to "build the wall" goes against the administration.
The bill allows dual prosecutions of people in the president's orbit who receive pardons or commutations.
A federal judge rejects the President's attempt to block a Congressional subpoena of his financial records.
Plus: "Offending religious feelings" in Poland, Trump tax returns, the latest "heartbeat bill," Denver's mushroom measure, and more...
Cory Booker’s plan would unjustly deprive peaceful Americans of the fundamental right to armed self-defense.
The libertarian legal analyst says Trump, like his White House predecessors, has abused executive power in all sorts of ways.
The Fox News legal analyst says the president is abusing executive power.
The California senator claims she could impose "near-universal background checks" and close the "boyfriend loophole" without new legislation.
That's a potentially dangerous combination.
Reason editors discuss Russia, Biden, Moulton (?), and that television show with the dragons.
Forget about Donald Trump and the Mueller report and think about all the little (and not-so-little) people who get crushed by the feds.
The symposium includes contributions by a variety of legal commentators, including fellow VC blogger Keith Whittington and myself.
Extreme partisanship and the desire for power will play as big a role in saving Trump's presidency as his aides did by ignoring his orders.
Donald Trump's rhetoric is breathtakingly authoritarian, but so far he's done less than his predecessors to expand executive power.
New York cops and the president arbitrarily turn legal products into contraband.
The ban, which took effect this week, usurps congressional authority by rewriting an inconvenient law.
A crude tool unlikely to do much good and that might do some harm.
The president signed an executive order supporting free speech on college campuses.
"It is the policy of the federal government to encourage institutions to foster environments that promote open, intellectually engaging, and diverse debate."
Thank Donald Trump for the belated attempt to enforce the Constitution's separation of powers.
How the overwhelming vote against Trump's position could potentially affect the lawsuits challenging the legality of the declaration.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanks
Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks