The NCC put together teams of conservatives, progressives, and libertarians to propose their own rewrites of the Constitution. All three teams came up with interesting ideas - and with some notable areas of agreement.
The escaped slave called the Constitution "a glorious liberty document" that justified extending equality to blacks and women.
Plus: Congress to vote today on marijuana decriminalization, new study shows bad news for indoor diners, and more...
One Ilya reviews a book written by another. Hopefully, this won't exacerbate #IlyaConfusion!
Is this the Supreme Court’s next big gun rights case?
Richard Epstein vs. Lawrence Lessig
Law professors Richard Epstein and Lawrence Lessig go head-to-head.
The Supreme Court nominee weighs in on a famous case.
Perhaps Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David Wecht ought to read more history, starting with the speeches of the late Rep. John Bingham.
Reviewing the record of the SCOTUS shortlister.
The restrictions imagined by Republicans in 2016 or by Democrats now are nothing but self-serving nonsense.
The National Apartment Association has joined a lawsuit brought by four individual landlords arguing the CDC's nationwide eviction moratorium is both illegal and unconstitutional.
“The Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency.”
I coauthored it with Harvard Law School Professor Randall Kennedy.
This year's annual confab is remote, but will still feature the annual B. Kenneth Simon Lecture and release of the Cato Supreme Court Review.
The episode reflects poorly on Biden.
A bust of the Dred Scott author stands in the old Supreme Court chambers in the capitol.
SCOTUS is the least democratic branch. Is that a bad thing?
A surprisingly agreeable chat on originalism, the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts and other things.
"Supreme Court jurisprudence...is heavily weighted against you," an appeals judge told state prosecutors last week.
The House voted to recognize the District of Columbia as a state, but many obstacles still lie ahead.
Can the government compel speech? For Supreme Court justices, that seems to depend on the content of that speech.
Fifth and final post in a series based on my new book "Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration, and Political Freedom"
"The fundamental protections set forth in our Constitution," Thomas writes, should be "applied equally to all citizens."
This unilateral executive action has been scrutinized by both Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr.
"Although California's guidelines place restrictions on places of worship," Roberts wrote, "those restrictions appear consistent with the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment."
Several courts have invalidated elements of state shelter-in-place orders. Constitutional law Professor Josh Blackman says that the longer they continue, the less legal they become.
"We have long interpreted the Georgia Constitution as protecting a right to work in one's chosen profession free from unreasonable government interference."
The anti-prostitution pledge is unconstitutional when applied to U.S. nonprofits. But the feds say it's still OK to compel speech from these groups' foreign affiliates.
The federal courts start to grapple with COVID-19 shutdown orders.
Not everything that states do in the name of protecting public health is consistent with the Constitution.
Courts so far have not been inclined to ask that question.
Plus: Family Dollar guard murdered over mask enforcement, doctors see "multisystem inflammatory syndrome" in kids with COVID-19, and more...
Infectious disease, public health, and the Constitution
Plus: Justin Amash seeking L.P. nomination, pandemic hasn't halted FDA war on vaping, and more
While denying Donald Trump's dictatorial impulses, William Barr notes that public health emergencies do not give governments unlimited powers.
A lost volume of American history finds the light of day.
The president contemplates a sweeping exercise of executive authority.
The president again insisted that the federal government can open the country by fiat. It cannot.
"Delaying abortions by weeks does nothing to further the State's interest in combatting COVID-19," they say.
Plus: Signal will leave the U.S. market if EARN IT passes, Justin Amash blasts Michigan shutdown orders, and more...
Will the Supreme Court question the underpinnings of the modern administrative state?
"Presidential emergency action documents” concocted under prior administrations purport to give him such authority, according to a New York Times op-ed.
“The federal government forgot the Tenth Amendment and the structure of the Constitution itself.”
Politicians and the public are alarmingly willing to violate civil liberties in the name of fighting the epidemic.
"These uncompensated seizures violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment."
