How increasingly letting states and citizens sue to stop laws and regulations they don’t like, such as President Trump’s immigration order, can politicize courts and end self-government.
If the Wyoming Supreme Court is permitted to insert an unstated requirement upon judges, what prevents some future court from reading pastors, priests, and bishops into the same decision?
Should pro-lifers who voted for the president because he promised to nominate a judge who would overturn Roe worry it won’t happen?
Chuck Schumer’s case against Neil Gorsuch relies on an argument that distorts the entire purpose of the Supreme Court.
Once I had the opportunity to serve in the Wisconsin legislature I realized just how severely flawed is the idea of looking to legislative history for guidance in statutory interpretation.
Today’s strong judicial activism goes against the purpose of the Supreme Court envisioned by the Founders, and defined in the Constitution.
The Federalist hosts a roundup of reactions to the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage legalization in Friday’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision.
Charles Murray’s clarion call for civil disobedience is tempting, but it’s also something that will challenge conservative orthodoxy on the courts.
- Report Reveals Shocking Double Standards For Bringing U.S. Rioters To JusticeThe sheer similarities and differences between the treacontinue reading >
- Biden And Harris Approval Ratings Plummet Across Multiple PollsA recent Rasmussen Reports poll also indicated that at continue reading >
- The Left Has A Pedophilia Problem, And It’s Out In The OpenThe left is continuing its tradition of destroying socicontinue reading >