The Second Amendment was supposed to protect us from government by dispersing its coercive power among the people. We still adhere to that system today.
What is more in accord with the rule of law: four justices usurping the power of a co-equal branch of government, or a legislature doing exactly what the state constitution allows?
President Trump was right that some countries are ‘sh-tholes,’ but we should remember that America is different because it was fortunate enough to be born free.
Political theater or not, DACA is probably unconstitutional. Something the pretend-defenders of law and order might want to remember.
While it would have been better for President Trump to have divested control of his businesses before taking office, not doing so does not necessarily violate the Constitution.
While there is plenty of hypocrisy to go around, Democrats’ newfound adoration for separation of powers simply isn’t credible.
No one doubts that the federal government has jurisdiction over immigration. Whether they can force the states to help them enforce immigration laws is another matter.
The Supreme Court’s ability to issue a binding opinion on any subject that no one else could overturn is inconsistent with the checks and balances the Framers crafted.
Steve Bannon explains President Trump’s ‘economic nationalism’ by taking a famous Reagan aphorism about government and turning it completely on its head.
President Trump can help restore balance and empower Congress to legislate specific solutions to problems facing the American people.
The president can lay aside Congress and multiple Supreme Court rulings because he now has the power to simply choose which laws to enforce and which to ignore.
As long as the administrative state thinks it can resist the people’s elected representatives, none of us can claim that the law rules and not men.
It’s clear the judges went through the exercise of writing an opinion so they could get to the outcome they wanted. The problem is, the outcome they wanted is, legally speaking, wrong.
A presidential election holds serious consequences. But if the republic can’t survive one bad executive, then it’s already dead.
Congress in 1866 was concerned about an unpopular, reactionary president using the Supreme Court to restrict the people’s rights. In 2017, we will likely find ourselves in a similar spot.
The Clinton campaign’s ignorance of the very basics of how American government functions is part of a trend of assuming that state and federal executives are elected dictators.
This novel practice violates the spirit of the separation of powers doctrine of the U.S. Constitution.
- America Is Over, But I Won’t See It Go Without An Epic FightBarring some unforeseen awakening, America is heading fcontinue reading >
- 4 Key Takeaways From Jim Jefferies’ Interview With Jordan PetersonTwo amazing things happened in these six minutes: A lefcontinue reading >
- I’m Sorry And I Want You Back: One Woman’s Open Letter To Her EyebrowsI don’t have many regrets. But you are among them. I continue reading >