A reply to Professor Andrew Koppelman
Samuel Alito Thinks It's Obviously Absurd To Suggest That Drug Prohibition Violates the Constitution
The justice overlooks the long American tradition of pharmacological freedom and the dubious constitutional basis for federal bans.
Adrian Vermeule responds to Judge Bill Pryor, and others comment on "Common Good Constitutionalism"
It explains why many of the reasons GOP senators gave for opposing Jackson were ridiculous, but also that there is nothing inherently wrong in opposing a qualified "mainstream" nominee based on differences over judicial philosophy.
A recent lecture defends Originalist judging against its upstart conservative rival.
We discussed my book "Free to Move," the state of originalism, and other issues.
The general assumption that the Fifth Amendment bars takings for economic development purposes rests on shaky ground.
I interviewed him on Book TV about his new book.
Supreme Court Ducks Opportunity to Clarify Regulatory Takings Doctrine - Over a Strong Dissent by Justice Thomas
Thomas is right that the doctrine is a mess. But the Court may not be in any hurry to clean it up.
Conservative Judges Chose Legal Principles Over Partisanship and Trump - But We Shouldn't Take that for Granted
Conservative judges have stymied Trump in his election challenges - and many other cases where his positions went against their legal principles. But a populist/nationalist GOP could gradually change the nature of conservative jurisprudence.
What original principles would say about this term's big case.
The accusation is often made. But it simply isn't true.
Amy Coney Barrett Thinks the Second Amendment Prohibits Blanket Bans on Gun Possession by People With Felony Records
The SCOTUS contender's 2019 dissent will alarm gun control supporters but reassure people who want judges to take this constitutional provision as seriously as others.
Forthcoming Article on "Overturning a Catch-22 in the Knick of Time: Knick v. Township of Scott and the Doctrine of Precedent"
The article explains why the Supreme Court was justified in overruling longstanding precedent in this important recent constitutional property rights case.
An old argument against "flexible and changeable interpretation."
When and How Can Lower-Court Judges Be Originalists?
If Kavanaugh is a committed originalist, you would never know it based on his complacent behavior in Timbs v. Indiana.
Strong originalist arguments exist for overruling the dual sovereign doctrine in a case being argued before the Supreme Court today.
Legal scholar Eric Segall argues originalism doesn't qualify as a constitutional theory because originalists disagree on too many things. His case is overstated. But if it's correct, the same criticism applies to living constitutionalism.
Living constitutionalists argue that their methodology allows us to improve constitutional law over time. But what if it actually makes it worse? Legal scholar Ernest Young raises that very question in an important new article.
Plus: Southern border will see more troops than Iraq, Syria.
First thoughts on Jonathan Gienapp's The Second Creation: Fixing the American Constitution in the Founding Era
Efforts on both right and left to make the democracy-promotion the key focus of constitutional law should be rejected.
I discuss the Kavanaugh nomination, originalism, and much more with Professors Dan Epps and Ian Samuel.
The National Constitution Center summarizes contributions to the ongoing debate over the constitutionality of the Space Force - including a new Congressional Research Service report on the subject.
The issue was recently raised by legal scholar Michael Dorf, and goes back to earlier debates about whether originalism implies that the Air Force is unconstitutional.
Jonathan Adler says he's "supremely qualified," an originalist, and a critic of the administrative state. But he's a cipher when it comes to defendants' rights.
Law professors Randy Barnett and Michael Dorf argued over "originalism" at an event hosted by the Soho Forum.