Category: U. S. Constitution
-
Robert Bork’s Originalism
Here you will gain some insight into the context of the Kavanaugh nomination fight. Excerpts: In Bork’s view, the Constitution derives its moral authority, as law, from the fact that the states ratified it. Accordingly, its text should be interpreted as it was understood at the time of its adoption. Judges have no warrant to…
-
Leftist Justices Don’t Like the Law
If you value the rule of law, you absolutely must oppose the hard-Left Democrat Party. Andrew Klavan: In general, the leftist minority on the [Supreme] court has shown itself no friend to the law. It really is disturbing. In Hawaii, only the five conservatives agreed that the president had the legal power to bar travel from certain countries…
-
SCOTUS Rules 5-4 to Uphold ‘Muslim’ Travel Ban
Yet another victory for President Trump and for common sense. And yet another embarrassment for the Never-Trumpers who refused to support Trump and who, by their refusal, indirectly supported Hillary who would never have supported any such travel ban. And of course, if the Never-Trumpers had their way, the composition of the Court would not…
-
The Second Amendment, First Principles, and the Right of Revolution
Trigger Warning! Likely to cause snowflake meltdown. Edward J. Erler offers one of the best explanations of the Second Amendment I have ever read. Clear, scholarly, and right-headed. The folly of Justice Stevens is exposed. An excerpt, with bolding added: Furthermore, the Declaration specifies that when government becomes destructive of the ends for which it…
-
On Opposing a Dangerous Ideology that is also a Religion
This article by William Kilpatrick bears on my ongoing conversation with a Canadian philosopher about Islam, religious tests, and constitutional interpretation. Last exchange here. I'll pull a few quotations from Professor Kilpatrick and add some comments. The idea of opposing dangerous ideologies is not foreign to Americans, but the idea of opposing an ideology that…
-
More on “No Religious Test”
A Canadian reader comments and I reply: I've been thinking about the problem of interpreting "no religious test" in light of your post. It's actually a very difficult problem! I'm almost convinced the correct response is that, unfortunately, if the Constitution is interpreted correctly then fundamentalist Muslims do indeed have the right to hold public office–given…
-
“No Religious Test”
In Article VI of the U. S. Constitution we read: . . . no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Does it follow that the U. S. Constitution should be so interpreted as to allow a Muslim citizen who supports sharia (Islamic…
-
A Modest Proposal: Revise the Second Amendment
John Paul Stevens today in the The New York Times called for the enactment of laws "prohibiting civilian ownership of semiautomatic weapons" and beyond that, as a "more effective and more lasting reform," the repeal of the Second Amendment. (I wonder if the good justice understands that semi-autos include most handguns owned and carried by…
-
Is Gun Ownership a Constitutionally Protected Right?
It is important to distinguish between rights and constitutionally protected rights. The right to life, for example, is a natural right. Its existence does not depend on anything of a conventional nature such as a constitution. We have the right whether or not it is constitutionally protected. Our great constitution protects our rights; it does…
-
Sorry Hillary, It’s Not About Hunting
John Daniel Davidson: Here it must be said that the Second Amendment was not meant to safeguard the right to hunt deer or shoot clay pigeons, or even protect your home and family from an intruder. The right to bear arms stems from the right of revolution, which is asserted in the Declaration of Independence and…
-
Bill Clinton’s Impeachment
I heard Representative Jackie Speier (D-California) say on Face the Nation this morning that former U. S. president William Jefferson Clinton "faced impeachment." Not so. He was impeached. What he faced, but did not suffer, was removal from office. Impeachment is not the same as removal from office. Impeachment is analogous to indictment in regular…
-
Free Speech: PragerU Sues Google
It is surely an outrage that Google would limit access to PragerU videos on YouTube given their high quality and educational value. So it is good news that Dennis Prager is punching back with a lawsuit: The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California, details upwards of 50 PragerU educational videos that YouTube has, in…
-
Reason to End Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Act
Andrew C. McCarthy explains: The problem is the substance of executive action. DACA is defective in two ways. First, it presumes to exercise legislative power by conferring positive legal benefits on a category of aliens (the “dreamers,” as concisely described in Yuval Levin’s Corner post). Second, it distorts the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion to rationalize this presidential legislating…