The argument that court expansion is unconstitutional is weak, transparently political — and most importantly, wrong.
Despite interest in overhaul, chamber would likely be a check
Giving each president two Supreme Court seats to fill would be a positive, transformative change.
The Court must decide whether to follow the Constitution’s clear text — or to rubber-stamp an illegal effort by Trump
In a 1987 survey, nearly half of Americans surveyed believed the phrase “From each according to ability; To each according to need” came from the U.S. Constitution.
Her originalism ignores the significance of the second American Revolution -- the Civil War and Reconstruction.
The Constitution even today does not offer an affirmative guarantee of the right to vote. If we truly want to build inclusive democracy, we must articulate an affirmative vision of an expansive right to vote in the Constitution itself.
Eric Foner, the pre-eminent historian of the civil war and Reconstruction, sees parallels with our own time but warns yesterday’s solution would be a disaster
“Most of all, I feel that I cannot be complicit in any way when I’ve seen so many examples of soldiers and police acting in bad faith,” he said via an encrypted text message.
This book argues the fight for true equality begun 150 years ago continues and draws clear connections between the limitations and loopholes written into these 19th century amendments and the most intractable debates dividing 21st century America.
Spread the word