What does this notation mean?
These are important opportunities for law students.
Nothing good comes from releasing a declination report for a person who will not be indicted.
If the Court kicks the insurrection issue to the election, the Court may also kick the immunity case to the election.
Earlier in the Constitutional Convention, the legislature had the power to appoint judges, ambassadors, and the treasurer. But that power was later stripped.
Our position is consistent with the "legal drafting culture" at the Constitutional Convention.
"Some more scholars" talk about Section 3
The states do not need Section 3 to impose qualifications on state-created positions. But only the national government should decide questions about the President.
Why did Jonathan Mitchell not vigorously defend Griffin's Case and Chief Justice Chase? And Mitchell missed Justice Barrett's question about direct/collateral challenges due to his refusal to accept the sword-shield dichotomy.
Justice Jackson explained that an ambiguous text should be interpreted in favor of expanding democracy. But Mitchell's concern about Foreign Emoluments Clause "boomerang" could have cut off a path of complete victory.
Justice Gorsuch demonstrates that he is the Court's most careful, consistent textualist.
Not exactly what I expected, but a very rewarding experience.
We started thinking about the topic on January 6, 2021, and have been writing since.
Keisler and Bernstein contradicted Luttig's position.
"The Legal Issues Behind the Colorado Ballot Disqualification Case"
"When the Supreme Court considers whether Donald J. Trump is barred from appearing on Colorado’s ballot, a professor’s scholarship, long relegated to the fringes, will take center stage."
Justice Scalia erred because there are no “Officers of the United States” appointed outside Article II, Section II.
Their amicus brief endorses the view that members of state legislatures are officers. They took the exact opposite position in 1995 and in subsequent publications.
A debate, a panel, and a lecture.
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