All Posts

Introduction Few issues of the Constitution have been discussed so often nor so controversially as the religious freedom. From the colonial period to the present day, court struggles to define the relationship between religion and the state. The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law “respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” But what does it actually mean? The Supreme Court has struggled to interpret these simple but pro

Introduction Few constitutional doctrines have garnered as much interest or controversy in recent years as originalism. Once a niche philosophy, it now enjoys the favor of the majority on the Supreme Court, informing the practice of law and the development of the administrative state. However, the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) illustrates its most prominent feature – the emphasis on historical research as the foundation of constitutional la

Introduction When a Supreme Court case captures the popular imagination, most people think of the familiar drama between the plaintiff and defendant. After all, they are the ones who bring the lawsuit – without them, there would be no case. Most of the Court’s biggest cases, however, involve not just two but dozens or even hundreds of other "parties" besides the plaintiff and defendant. Businesses, historians, civil rights lawyers, ex-governors, law professors, trade associat

Introduction Nearly every student who takes a government or civics class learns about Marbury v. Madison in their studies. Decided in 1803, this landmark Supreme Court ruling established the doctrine of judicial review which allows courts to declare laws unconstitutional. The ruling, authored by Chief Justice John Marshall, gave the Supreme Court authority to interpret the constitutionality of Congressional laws. But there is one prevailing misconception regarding Marbury v.

Introduction The Constitution was signed in 1787, but that did not make it immediately official. It had to be approved by the states in a contentious political battle. Supporters of the Constitution insisted that a stronger central government was needed to ensure the survival of the republic. Meanwhile, opponents argued that the proposed document would create a government with too much power and ruin individual liberty. In newspapers across the country, essays were written ab

Introduction For decades, photos and video have been among the most reliable forms of evidence. A photo could provide proof of a person’s location and a video could often provide incontrovertible evidence of an event. As such, visual evidence has been regarded as one of the most compelling types of information in a court of law. This is no longer the case. Advances in artificial intelligence have generated new ways to create images, audio, and video that appear to show people

Introduction The first amendment to the US Constitution is deceptively short: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Those two clauses have spawned countless conflicts in the courts. Recent court cases dealing with the rights of churches, hospitals, and charities to practice religiously motivated policies have frequently required judges to interpret the first amendment. The upcoming term of the supreme c

Introduction Most Supreme Court decisions have been relegated to a line or two in the business section of the newspaper after a day or two. A few, however, shape the constitutional underpinnings of American government and go on to affect the daily lives of millions of Americans for decades. The case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , decided by the Supreme Court in 2024, overruled a long-standing precedent about the relationship between Congress, the federal agencies,

Introduction History has been traditionally thought to be the study of what happened before. Courts, on the other hand, have been about the here and the now. But when it comes to constitutional law, the two areas are deeply intertwined. The interpretation of the Constitution, particularly with regard to rights, has been inseparable from history. This is especially apparent in the current judicial practice. Courts are returning to history to ground contemporary constitutional

Introduction Presidents of the United States have always tried to expand their powers, and national emergencies are the best opportunities for such expansions. When war breaks out, or economic collapse looms, or the nation’s security is threatened, many Americans are likely to accept any actions by the President that they believe will restore the country to normal. However, how much power can the President actually use when the nation is in crisis? This was the question that

Introduction Imagine waking up one morning to learn that a court ruled on a matter that concerns your property or money, without ever notifying you directly. Perhaps you were never aware that there was a proceeding in the first place. While it might seem unfair, this practice was once common. Many jurisdictions used to allow notification via newspaper advertisement because it was considered sufficient. In Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., the US Supreme Court was f

Introduction Ask most Americans what the three branches of the federal government are, and they will happily name Congress, the presidency, and the courts. That division of government power has been enshrined in the Constitution for more than two centuries. But when it comes to day-to-day governance, the feds rely on entities outside of the presidential administrations and the legislative branch. Independent agencies like the Securities Exchange Commission, Federal Trade Comm

Introduction When we think about constitutional law in America, we often think about the U.S. Constitution. Supreme Court cases are front-page news; disputes about the First or Second Amendment dominate political discourse; and, in school, we memorize famous federal court decisions. But, every state has its own constitution. These state constitutions typically get less attention than they deserve, even though they touch on many issues more relevant to the ordinary citizen. Ed

Introduction When the Supreme Court announces a decision, people are often most interested in one question: who won? The winning side's opinion becomes the new law of the land, and that's what lawyers, judges, and policymakers care about most. Meanwhile, the losing opinion has no immediate impact on the law. It cannot undo a conviction or a government action. Nevertheless, many of the most important opinions in the history of the Supreme Court began life as dissents. Througho

Introduction The United States Constitution has been around for over 230 years. It was drafted in an era before electricity, cars, planes, telephones, the internet, or even modern computers. Surprisingly, this document serves as a basis for making decisions about topics that didn’t even exist when it was written. How is such a thing possible? The answer to this question will not be found in the Constitution itself, but rather in the minds of those who interpret it. Even thoug

Introduction Freedom of the press is one of the pillars of the American Constitution. Journalists investigate, report, and remind citizens of their role as participants in a democratic society. But what happens when the government claims that publishing certain information may endanger the country? This issue was raised in the famous Pentagon Papers Case, decided by the Supreme Court in 1971. New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971).¹ The case questioned wheth

Introduction It is common for democracies to enact laws in times of crisis that would otherwise be considered unfair or oppressive. Such measures as banning protests, imposing censorship, restricting travel, and detaining suspected threats to the state are often rational during wars and other emergencies but can have adverse effects on constitutional rights long after the crisis has passed. Perhaps the most famous example involves the US government’s mass incarceration of Jap

Introduction The First Amendment to the US Constitution states that Congress shall make no law “abridging the freedom of speech.” It is common knowledge that the First Amendment protects citizens from being penalized by the government for their speech. However, it is not as widely known that the First Amendment also protects citizens from being “forced to speak.” The application of this principle is complicated by the fact that some of the entities most frequently compelled t

Introduction It stands out clearly: setting up a corporation brings one key benefit, protection of personal wealth. When advised on structure, many hear how incorporation separates private resources from company risk. Should financial collapse occur, or legal claims arise, those who hold shares typically face loss confined to their initial investment alone. Homes remain untouched. Savings stay secure. Personal belongings do not enter the equation. Most companies experience th

Introduction Beginning with "We the People," the Constitution opens a discussion. On initial review, such phrasing appears to resolve clearly who holds rights under it. Human individuals, not corporations, are named at its start. Yet what follows has prompted long examination. Meaning shifts slightly when context changes. Written intent does not always match applied result. One phrase carries weight far beyond its syllables. Still, U.S. courts continue to affirm corporate rig