This holiday season, with many still suffering post-election despair, give the gift that keeps on giving: The Naked Constitution! It’s an upbeat, user-friendly guide to the original meaning of the Constitution, and how we can — and must — revive that meaning. It’s available wherever books are sold. Check out the “Books” page of this site or look here for links to Amazon and all the other retailers.
Here’s a video of a lively panel discussion hosted by the Manhattan Institute. I had the honor of being on the panel with Professors Richard Epstein, Nicholas Rosenkranz, and Michael Greve — distinguished scholars all. We discuss originalism, federalism, standards of review, and how to be faithful to the text. Check it out! http://livestre.am/4eTkf
I recently appeared on Blaze TV’s Real News to debate the constitutionality of laws preserving the traditional defintion of marriage. As I say on the show, the question isn’t whether same-sex marriage is good policy, the question is: who gets to decide? The people and their elected representatives, or 5 unelected justices? Take a peek, here.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced that it would hear appeals in two cases involving same-sex marriage. The Court will decide the fate of:
- The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): can the federal government define “marriage” for the purpose of eligibility for federal benefits?
- California Proposition 8: can a state define “marriage” as the union of one man and one-woman?
The two cases should raise distinct issues. DOMA implicates federalism issues, while Prop 8 — if it raises any federal question at all – must be considered under the 14th Amendment. Over at Ricochet, I analyze the issues, here.