More than you might think—and it’s getting better all the time.
Why President Trump is an "Officer" who Can be Disqualified From Holding Public Office Under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment [Updated]
The opposing view is contrary to the original meaning, and leads to absurd conclusions.
My response to Rob Natelson's argument that Madison's Report is largely irrelevant to the constitutional debate over immigration.
Its existence was revealed when Justice John Paul Stevens' papers were made public earlier this week.
The liberal justice seems ready to fight legal conservatives on their own ground.
Originalist scholar Larry Solum suggests KBJ could be the Left's Antonin Scalia.
Professor Natelson versus Professor Ablavsky
If the Supreme Court was correct in Dobbs, was it wrong in Bolling?
A new study sheds interesting light on these questions.
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.