Why the Supreme Court can rule in favor of Congress in the Trump financial records cases without thereby giving Congress any unlimited power.
The scheme, created by a concurrent resolution, is inconsistent with the Kansas Emergency Management Act. A legislative council's decision to overrule the Governor's church shutdown order has thus been invalidated, and the church shutdown is back in effect.
A "drafting snafu" with the Legislature's concurring resolution, which endorsed the Governor's initial emergency order, is casting many things in doubt.
Adjudication Outside Article III (part two)
The Senate minority leader threatened two justices by name, and then he lied about it.
The presidential candidate reserves the right to wage unauthorized wars, kill Americans in foreign countries, prosecute journalists, and selectively flout the law.
Other possible legal challenges to Trump's expanded travel ban may be precluded by the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Hawaii. This one is not.
Republicans are setting a dangerous precedent they may come to regret the next time a Democrat occupies the White House.
The legal basis for such a ruling is hard to find.
John Bolton may have critical evidence relevant to the House impeachment inquiry; why hasn't the House subpoenaed his testimony?
An important development in the legal wrangling over the separation of powers.
An amicus filing in the case challenging the Emergency Declaration's diversion of funds towards building the Wall
The Supreme Court will consider a constitutional challenge to the composition of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Thirteen legal scholars weigh in, including the VC's Keith Whittington and myself.
Plus: FBI rebuked by FISA court, how Harris could come back, and more…
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders convinced the Fifth Circuit to declare the Federal Housing Finance Agency's structure unconstitutional, but they're seeking Supreme Court review nonetheless.
While there may be sound political reasons to let voters decide Trump's fate, there are sound constitutional reasons to clarify the limits of his authority.
In a newly filed brief with the Supreme Court, the Justice Department claims the Consumer Financial Protection Board's structure is unlawful.
Top justice rules that trying to push a criminal case forward over prosecutors’ objections is a violation of separation of powers.
It's a win for Trump; but only on procedural grounds. The broader legal battle over the wall is far from over.
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.
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.
From Prof. Jonathan Nash (Emory), an expert on Congressional standing.
An interesting separation of powers question coming in the Female Genital Mutilation statute / Commerce Clause / Religious Freedom Restoration Act / Dawoodi Bohra litigation.
The first court decision on Trump's plan to reallocate federal funds to "build the wall" goes against the administration.
When politicians tell you we are in a constitutional crisis, you shouldn’t take it at face value.
The California senator claims she could impose "near-universal background checks" and close the "boyfriend loophole" without new legislation.
"This isn't a partisan issue," the Utah senator says. "This is a constitutional issue."
Congress seems to have authorized this end run around its spending power. Can it do that?
My 2015 critique of Presidents Day is, if anything, even more relevant four years later.
A few thoughts on the First Circuit's separation of powers ruling on the Puerto Rico bankruptcy board
Judge Tigar's (ND CA) asylum decision is an especially inappropriate target for Trump's ranting, given the weakness of the Administration's position on the legal issues raised by the case.
Why first principles suggest that Matthew Whitaker's acting appointment is invalid, but precedent and practice might suggest the opposite.
Progressives appreciate the separation of powers-up to a point.
A great set of colloquies on originalism, the Federalist, and human imperfection.
He's right that Congress has delegated too much power, but wrong about the reason, which is not that Congress is afraid to legislate but that it legislates too much.
Like Neil Gorsuch, the D.C. Circuit judge has criticized Chevron deference for encouraging executive arrogance.
The attorney general pretends to discover that the controversial rifle accessories are already illegal.
Many people fear that John Bolton and Donald Trump might start an unnecessary war. But such fears would be unnecessary if Congress were to reclaims it power to initiate war.
Since the accessories are legal, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is helping the president rewrite the law.
The court concluded that the travel ban exceeds the scope of presidential authority and violates immigration laws enacted by Congress.
A prominent constitutional law scholar highlights the perils of wars waged without congressional authorization - a practice engaged in by Obama and now perpetuated by Trump.
He's more than happy to engage in power grabs when it helps his agenda.
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