Okay fine, I'll start. Last night I said on Bluesky that I want to see people laying the foundation, in the public discourse, for the idea that if and when Trump orders the military to go invade Greenland – because apparently he is quite serious about this whole "
How many amendments does our Constitution have? You would think this should not be a difficult question! And yet. You may have seen headlines recently to the effect that certain liberal activists are asking President Biden to declare that the Equal Rights Amendment has been duly adopted as the Twenty-Eighth
Magic: the Gathering
A week ago I wrote the following on Bluesky: I agree with this, BUT ALSO, I do sort of think we need a vision of a green-mana-aligned left-liberalism, that the current orientation is pretty anti-green in a way that bothers me — Robert Black (@hurricanexyz.bsky.social) 2024-12-08T23:45:11.264Z
This post is going to be a little weird, particularly if you're here for the legal theory. This is going to be different from my last primer, about the six modalities of constitutional argument. But I got involved in a discussion about this stuff on Bluesky over the
So the latest insanity is apparently Trump talking – how seriously is anybody's guess – about conquering and/or annexing Canada. He is said to have joked(?) with Canadian Premier Justin Trudeau that Canada should become America's 51st state. I have a better idea. In the couple of
His presidency will be unlawful from top to bottom. He is ineligible to the office of president, or for that matter any other public office state or federal, under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids those who (1) held public office and took an oath to support the
Hey remember that series of mine about How (Not) To Reform the Supreme Court? Have you been waiting patiently for the next installment? Yeah. So. I've been spending the time since the election... well, reeling, first and foremost. But as part of the reeling, trying to figure out
The essential premise of fascism is that the individual has no existence save as part of the collective. I've been wrestling with this ever since it became clear that Trump is going to get back into power last night. So much of my identity is wrapped up in
After a hiatus of slightly more than two months, here, finally, is the second part of my series on How (Not) to Reform the Supreme Court! This time, I'm covering what I consider to be the single most important piece of any court reform effort: court-packing, these days
My How (Not) To Reform the Supreme Court series got slightly interrupted by my month off from writing here. But yesterday Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), one of the good ones, introduced a court reform proposal, and there's one particular feature of it that I wanted to comment on:
As I mentioned in my introductory post, one of my ambitions for this site is to create a resource library for those interested in learning about constitutional theory. This post is the first of what I hope will be many in that vein: a basic primer on the six so-called
Today the Senate Democrats introduced what they style the "No Kings Act," which purports to overrule Trump v. United States. Now, you may be saying, wait a minute, Trump v. U.S. was a constitutional case, how can Congress overrule it by ordinary legislation? The answer is that