The Framers would have never tolerated debt-limit brinkmanship. It’s time to put this terrible idea on trial.
This book is a detailed critique of the judicial philosophy to which the current majority of the Supreme Court of the United States adheres.
A new book argues that the Constitution is best understood as a document calling for the unashamed struggle for equality.
Our most fundamental rights are being trampled by a tyrannical, unaccountable, and unelected force.
Originalism, as used by this Court, just provides cover for a right-wing political agenda. It is a threat to democracy.
The conservative Supreme Court's favorite judicial philosophy requires a very, very firm grasp of history — one that none of the justices seem to possess.
The Congressional Research Service points out two things that are missing in Canning: precedent and practicality. A quick glance at a dictionary written more than a quarter-century before the Framing, in another country, was enough to sweep away any counterarguments -- most particularly the argument that, whatever words the Framers may have chosen, they were designing a government that would work, not one that would fall apart whenever 40 senators felt grumpy.
Spread the word