The Dangerous Supreme Court
the division of powers in the American system disappeared long ago, and the checks and balances do not work.
First Amendment Decision Unrelated to the First Amendment
People often claim that the Supreme Court is “conservative.” Rob Natelson says, “not so fast!”
A Basement Full of Water: Another View of the Health Care Ruling
U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson stopped a leak, but didn’t clean up the flooding…
Making stuff up as they go
This is not rocket-science. You cannot have a Constitutional rule of law with inconsistent, flexible rules like the courts use.
The Federal Courts are Complicit
As this ruling and its antecedents clearly demonstrate, the courts offer no hope as they have tied their wagons to the horses of tyranny running roughshod over our Constitution.
Who Decides?
There is nothing in the Constitution, including the supremacy clause, which prohibits States from interpreting the Constitution for themselves. In fact, the supremacy clause requires the federal and state judiciary to do just that.
Half a Century of More of the Same
by Connor Boyack, Utah Tenth Amendment Center On August 23, 1958, 46 Chief Justices from the Supreme Courts of the several states gathered together in Pasadena, California. The event drawing their presence was the Conference of Chief Justices, a regular forum for the highest judges in each state to meet and discuss important issues. Their [...]
Judicial Supremacy or State Nullification?
When lawyers and judges complete law school without even reading the Constitution, instead learning from the vaunted faculty that the Constitution makes the Supreme Court the exclusive arbiter of that document, you are conditioned to believe it.
Gun Liberty and McDonald
Thomas Jefferson once wrote that “the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” This is especially the case with gun liberty. The price of absolute gun liberty is indeed eternal vigilance.
Whether They Want us to or Not
When states do their duty and stand up for our liberty, they’re not looking for approval from federal courts – they’re protecting us from them.
When Commerce is not Commerce
James Madison: “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.”
The Courts and the Commerce Clause: Obliterating Original Intent
Every piece of federal economic regulation from the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890) to all of the 1930s New Deal securities and banking law has been rationalized (made “constitutional”) by reference to the commerce clause.
Kevin Gutzman: Freedom vs the Courts
In this podcast, Kevin Gutzman talks about the Incorporation Doctrine and why liberty is best protected under the founders’ vision of federalism.
The Marbury v. Madison Mantra
The arguments against the power of the states to arrest federal tyranny are as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning, and they generally start with Marbury.
Planners in Black Robes
Richard Epstein has, in How Progressives Rewrote the Constitution, defied the current scholarly consensus.
The Supreme Court Scare
the federal government is not the source of our freedom; the states have the duty to resist the encroachments of federal usurpation; and freedom can be restored when the Confederate Republic is restored.
Is the Supreme Court Supreme?
If asked, who has the final say in our government on the meaning of the Constitution, most people would say, the Supreme Court, but it this right?
