Below is a round-up of the latest from the “Battle for the Constitution:” a special project on the constitutional debates in American life, in partnership with The Atlantic.
What Would Happen if Trump Refused to Leave Office?
By Barbara McQuade, Former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan
Barbara McQuade argues that if Donald Trump does not peacefully leave office after either losing the next presidential election or after completing two terms, the country’s institutions and laws must remove him, because a successful transfer of power is essential to American democracy.
By Peter M. Shane, Jacob E. Davis and Jacob E. Davis II chair in law at The Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law
Peter M. Shane asserts that the Trump administration is attempting to undermine the impartiality of independent governmental agencies and weaken those agencies’ ability to penalize malfeasance by impairing administrative adjudicators.
By Adam Cohen, author of Supreme Inequality: The Supreme Court’s Fifty-Year Battle for A More Unjust America
Adam Cohen contends that, unlike the Warren Court of the 1960s, over the last 50 years the Supreme Court has neglected the poor and become hostile to them.
Trump’s DOJ Interference Is Actually Not Crazy
By Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Mario Loyola traces some of the major Supreme Court cases and intellectual underpinnings of the unitary-executive theory to argue that Donald Trump is rightly asserting broad power over the Department of Justice and other agencies.
The Mysterious Meaning of the Second Amendment
By James C. Phillips, Nonresident Fellow, Stanford University’s Constitutional Law Center and Josh Blackman, Associate Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston
James C. Phillips and Josh Blackman discuss how a new data tool, corpus linguistics—which gives people the ability to search massive amounts of historical texts—can provide guidance about the original public meaning of the Constitution, and how their research with it shows there were flaws in both the majority opinion and dissent in the landmark Second Amendment case, District of Columbia v. Heller.
