That is the subject of this interesting post by law professor Josh Blackman. Blackman observes, in part: Another angle to consider is whether the Necessary and Proper clause is broad enough to cover something as invasive as forcing individuals to be vaccinated. While this may be necessary, it is likely not proper. If the Court…
Continue Reading »
In his opinion for a unanimous three judge panel of the D.C. Circuit declaring unconstitutional President Obama’s purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board, Judge Laurence Silberman eloquently explained why adherence to the original meaning of the Constitution is so important: In any event, if some administrative inefficiency results from our construction of…
Continue Reading »
A federal appellate court recently struck down Texas’ proposed Congressional redistricting plan, finding that the plan violated Section 5. Might the court’s opinion in that case provide the impetus for the Supreme Court to strike down Section 5 once and for all? That is what Nicholas Stephanopolous suggests in a recent post at The New…
Continue Reading »
So former Solicitor General and current Harvard Law School Professor tells us that the federal government could, if it were of a mind to, issue a mandate requiring Americans to buy vegetables, and that such a mandate would pass Constitutional muster (thankfully, the good Professor tells us that they couldn’t actually force us to EAT…
Continue Reading »
One of the longest running debates in American politics – and one on which the conservative side has fairly consistently prevailed – involves the proper role of the courts in our Constitutional system. Polls have consistently shown that a solid majority of the electorate agrees that the courts should limit themselves toppling the law, and…
Continue Reading »