Tag: Constitution

Join Jim and Greg as they dive into billionaire Elon Musk’s proposal to buy Twitter and why it makes the left so angry. They also dissect a new report quoting multiple officials alleging California Sen. Diane Feinstein is quickly losing her mental acuity. And Joy Behar of “The View” bizarrely claims that the Supreme Court is poised to “pass a bill” to allow open carry in New York despite the high court having no such power.

Member Post

 

The question was first raised in 2015, if not before. Could then-President Barack Obama, having been elected twice, run as then-Vice President and putative Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s running mate? Betting sites focused on the 2020 election gave it 2 percent odds. And those same sites are taking bets for 2024. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Advise. Don’t Consent.

 

Justice John Masrshall by Henry Inman

Justice John Marshall by Henry Inman.

Lawrence Tribe says that the Vice President cannot legally function as a tie-breaker in a judicial confirmation vote.

If he’s right, that would give the GOP leverage in the confirmation process. But the Senate GOP needs to take its role seriously. Too many Republicans say things like, “The President should get the justices he wants, as long as the nominees are qualified.” Lindsay Graham has put that saying into practice.

Hubwonk host Joe Selvaggi talks with Cato Institute Vice President Ilya Shapiro about the recent Supreme Court vaccine mandate rulings and what they tell us about the limits of executive branch power and the sitting justices’ views on the guidance of the U.S. Constitution.
Guest:

Ilya Shapiro is a vice president of the Cato Institute, director of the Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, and publisher of the Cato Supreme Court Review. Before joining Cato, he was a special assistant/adviser to the MultiNational Force in Iraq on rule of law issues and practiced at Patton Boggs and Cleary Gottlieb. Shapiro is the author of Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America’s Highest Court (2020), coauthor of Religious Liberties for Corporations? Hobby Lobby, the Affordable Care Act, and the Constitution (2014), and editor of 11 volumes of the Cato Supreme Court Review (2008–18). He has contributed to a variety of academic, popular, and professional publications, regularly provides commentary for various media outlets, is a legal consultant to CBS News. He holds an AB from Princeton University, an MSc from the London School of Economics, and a JD from the University of Chicago Law School (where he became a Tony Patiño Fellow).

Quote of the Week: Your Rights

 

“Your rights get lost when you depart from the original meaning. And then sometimes, wait, it gets worse. Not only does it take stuff away, it puts stuff in there that isn’t.” — Justice Neil Gorsuch

Given this week’s Supreme Court hearings, this quote seemed appropriate. Especially since several Justices put stuff in that isn’t there. Such as statements about 100,000 kids being hospitalized for Covid with many on ventilators. Or that another justice claimed that there were 750 million new cases of Omicron just yesterday. (Even worldwide, that means close to 1/10 of the global population contracted Omicron just this week. In the US? Everyone caught it twice yesterday.) These are the minds that will be deciding the fate of millions. I don’t know if that scares you. It certainly scares me.

Member Post

 

Click here to listen to the podcast! On this episode of the Resistance Library Podcast, Sam and Dave discuss Constitution Day. Constitution Day is a dual observance: It celebrates both the day that the United States Constitution was adopted, as well as honors naturalized citizens of our country. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

Constitution Day is a dual observance: It celebrates both the day that the United States Constitution was adopted, as well as honors naturalized citizens of our country. Prior to 2004, the day was known as Citizenship Day. Its name was changed due to an amendment attached to a spending bill by Sen. Robert Byrd. While there was an archaic form […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

On Covid and Texas, Biden Courts a Constitutional Crisis

 

When Donald Trump was president, we heard a lot about Norms® and Standards. Trump was accused of violating this vague collection of unwritten rules, a convenient tactic when they couldn’t prove actual crimes. The good news was that Biden’s election would restore this Beltway-approved system of etiquette. How refreshing.

Eight months into his administration, Biden has folded, spindled, and mutilated our Norms® and Standards, even those mandated by the Constitution. Trump was erratic but Biden is openly courting a constitutional crisis.

Pressured by far-left backbencher Cori Bush in August, the White House reinstated an eviction ban already declared illegal by the Supreme Court. Biden knew it was a violation but said: “by the time it gets litigated, it will probably give some additional time.”

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome New York Democrats planning to expedite the impeachment probe of Gov. Andrew Cuomo and a new poll showing most New Yorkers want him out of office. They also hammer President Biden for bringing back the eviction moratorium while admitting the Supreme Court will probably rule against him. And they’re exasperated as NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins goes on national television and tells parents to mask up at home to protect their kids from COVID.

 

Member Post

 

I recently came across a court opinion including a particularly rousing and powerful defense of originalism in the interpretation of the Constitution.  No one, we presume, supposes that any change in public opinion or feeling . . . should induce the court to give to the words of the Constitution a more liberal construction in […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. What if you don’t believe in a Creator? Or that He has created us all equal? Or that we have […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

Attempting to read the United States Constitution in its entirety can be an intimidating task. At over 7,500 words including the Ammendments and its place as the single most important document in the history of the U.S. – it’s vital for all Americans to know what it stands for, the freedoms it provides, and the […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

Understand that to surrender even a tad of freedom, a touch of liberty, or a bit of property—whether to climate change, Covid, national security, the “common good” or “society’—based on the decree of a demented, illegitimate president, a narcissistic zealot like AOC, the descendant of a nepotistic lineage of privileged inbreds like Pelosi or Newsom, […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

Trump supporters who contest the 2020 election lose their 5th, 4th, and 1st Amendment rights, Constitutional liberty interests, and writ of habeus corpus  in Washington DC Courts, where the guy with the viking horns is being held without bail because he might “push false claim of election fraud” if released.   Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

TurleyVision 1999: Impeachment as a Madisonian Device

 

My dear spouse occasionally forwards me the legal theories of Jonathan Turley, who currently argues Trump’s impeachment trial is unconstitutional now that Trump is a former official. Curious as to what Turley had to say about impeachment before Trump, I did some digging and struck a mother lode: Turley’s 146-page 1999 Duke Law Journal article, Senate Trials and Factional Disputes: Impeachment As A Madisonian Device. Turley’s reasons for publishing such a masterwork in 1999 may not have been dispassionate, since he had recently testified at Bill Clinton’s impeachment, but since Trump’s presidency wasn’t even a gleam in the old GOP elephant’s eye back then, Turley’s thoughts on impeachment in 1999 should at least be free of any bias for or against Trump. Those with the patience to read — or at least skim — Impeachment As A Madisonian Device will be rewarded with plenty of information on impeachment’s constitutional function and history that’s interesting in its own right, and a perspective in which the non-juridical, political nature of impeachment transcends mere raw exercise of power.

Impeachment As A Madisonian Device extensively surveys the constitutional history of impeachment. Its thesis is that the impeachment process, declared first in the House, then passed to the Senate for trial, culminates in

The Best Articles I Read in 2020

 

Here at the end of 2020, I’m trying to close up a number of tabs I have open on my browser. Many of them are articles, and of that number I’m certain several were suggested or linked to by fellow Ricochet members, mentioned in podcasts, or discovered through searches prompted by Ricochet discussions. I was originally going to say “The 10 Best Articles…”, but the list is more than ten articles and I’m sure I’m forgetting some additional ones that I read months ago…it’s been a long year.

For this post I loosely define “the best” articles as those that challenged my thinking on an issue, were educational, were unexpected or deservedly scandalous, courageously broke with prevailing current narratives, or discussed an important topic otherwise ignored or forgotten. I’m not going to say which characteristic applies to which article as I’m trying to keep this post relatively brief, and each article could form the foundation of a post and become fertile ground for discussion. Some of the articles were written in years prior to 2020, but I just got around to reading them this year and they were either prophetic or remain pertinent to current events. Grouped with some of the articles I have read, I’m also listing what I’m going to read next in regard to that topic. These will have “to be read” in parentheses next to them.

Religious Liberty Should Prevail

 

This past week in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, the Supreme Court re-entered the dangerous minefield at the junction of religious liberty and anti-discrimination. The current dispute arose when Philadelphia’s Department of Human Services announced that it would no longer refer children to Catholic Social Services (CSS) for placement in foster care because CSS refused to consider same-sex couples as potential foster parents. CSS was, however, prepared to accept into its foster care all children regardless of their sexual orientation. After prolonged negotiations with the city failed, CSS sued. It seeks, in the words of the Third Circuit, “an order requiring the city to renew their contractual relationship while permitting it to turn away same-sex couples who wish to be foster parents.” The Third Circuit upheld the position of the city.

Resolving this delicate confrontation requires a return to first principles. Let’s start with the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion, as elaborated in Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion in Employment Division v. Smith. Alfred Leo Smith, a drug guidance counselor, was denied unemployment benefits after being terminated for consuming peyote, a controlled substance, as part of a religious rite. The court held that his religious beliefs do not “excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the state is free to regulate.” The First Amendment did not require Oregon to accommodate Smith’s religious practice. Any neutral law of general applicability was acceptable, notwithstanding its disparate impact.

Notably, the word exercise is broad enough to cover not only Smith’s use of peyote but also CSS’s adoption policies. Accordingly, under no circumstances should Philadelphia be allowed to pass an ordinance that requires the Catholic Church to ordain women as priests, or to offer family aid services paid from its own funds to same-sex couples. The question in Fulton is whether CSS’s free exercise rights are forfeited when the city supplies public funds and matching services to CSS and the children it puts up for foster care.

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer the confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. They also discuss the Philadelphia police-involved shooting of a man advancing toward officers with a knife and the resulting violence that left 30 officers injured, including 12 in the hospital. And they break down the left’s unhinged reaction to the Barrett confirmation – from immediate calls for court packing to claiming originalism is racist – while Jim points out that the left probably ought to blame Ruth Bader Ginsburg for Barrett being on the court.