Filter By:
Date
Topic
- Economic Policy (27) Apply Economic Policy filter
- Education (9) Apply Education filter
- Energy, Science & Technology (7) Apply Energy, Science & Technology filter
- Foreign Affairs & National Security (23) Apply Foreign Affairs & National Security filter
- Health Care (4) Apply Health Care filter
- Middle East & North Africa (1) Apply Middle East & North Africa filter
- US Politics (34) Apply US Politics filter
- Values & Social Policy (32) Apply Values & Social Policy filter
Type
Search
James Ceaser is the Harry F. Byrd Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, director of the Program for Constitutionalism and Democracy, and was a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author of several books on American politics and American political thought, including...
Of Power and Providence
The old U.S. and the new EU
What Did the Founders Think They Were Doing?
Why do we vote, and what do we get for our trouble? By Harvey C. Mansfield.
Great Debates
The creation of the new Afghan constitution was rife with conflict. Will it bring peace to this long-suffering country? By J Alexander Thier.
The Palestinian Proletariat
Permanent refugees, generation after generation: these are the fruit of a U.N. agency that blocks both peace and a Palestinian state. By Michael S. Bernstam.
Fighting Words
Craig S. Lerner on A Time to Fight: Reclaiming a Fair and Just America by Jim Webb
Original Thomas, Conventional Souter
What kind of justices should the next president pick?
Forty Years of Originalism
THE HIGH (AND MIGHTY) COURT: Judicial Supremacy
Did the framers of the United States Constitution intend that the Supreme Court be the sole and final interpreter of the Constitution, with the power to place binding decisions on the executive and legislative branches? Or did they intend that the Supreme Court have the final say only on the legal cases that came before it, thus permitting the executive and legislative branches to have wide latitude in interpreting the Constitution for themselves? The former view, that of judicial supremacy, is the dominant view of the Supreme Court today, accepted, for the most part, both within government and in society more generally. Is this view supported by the Constitution? If not, why and when did it arise? Should we support judicial supremacy, or is it time to rein in the Supreme Court?
OUT FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL: The Supreme Court and the Constitution
The Supreme Court has the final authority on all matters of law under the U.S. Constitution. But what legal philosophy should the Supreme Court use to reach its decisions? Should the Court merely hand down rules based on the text of a fixed, or "dead," Constitution? Or should the Court apply standards that are based on interpretations of a "living" Constitution that evolves as our society changes? These fundamentally different approaches to constitutional law have created a rift with the current Supreme Court. How serious is this rift? Who's right? And to what extent are these competing arguments merely covers for ideological positions?
Audio recording of “Out for a Constitutional” (26:48)
ANOTHER BRICK IN THE WALL: The Separation of Church and State
The First Amendment of the Constitution declares in part that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." What did this amendment mean to the founders who wrote it? Did they intend to establish an inviolate "wall of separation between church and state"? Or was their intent instead to merely preserve religious freedom and prevent the establishment of a national religion?
Glimpses of Economic Liberty
Bit by bit, courts are being forced to ponder the laws and licenses that stifle people’s freedom to work. By Clint Bolick.
We the Slave Owners
In Jefferson's America, were some men not created equal?
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4