Constitution Daily

Smart conversation from the National Constitution Center

The Constitution This Week: Immigration, veeps, and Myanmar

April 27, 2012 by Holly Munson


News headlines, politicians, and hot-button issues come and go,  but   one 225-year-old document continues to emerge in our conversations   about our nation’s most important questions and challenges: the   Constitution.  The Constitution is a big buzzword for Election 2012,  and more than ever, citizens, pundits, and politicians are turning to   the Constitution for answers–and sometimes ammunition, as they try to   prove the Constitution is on their side.


Here’s a brief look at the top constitutional news stories and commentaries from this week.

1. The Constitution and…Immigration

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments for Arizona v. United States, the challenge of Arizona’s controversial immigration law, S.B. 1070.


The federal government is arguing that it has the last word in immigration law, and that Arizona overstepped its power. Supporters of the Arizona argue that the state was making a state law for a unique state problem not sufficiently addressed by the federal government.

2. The Constitution and…Veeps

[youtube ZUnAbwaDYr0]


As the Republican party has unofficially accepted Mitt Romney as its nominee, speculation has begun about his VP pick; the list of potentials includes popular rabble-rousers like Chris Christie and fresh-faced up-and-comers like Marco Rubio. Meanwhile, in the world of television, HBO launched a perfectly-timed new series, Veep, with Julia Louis-Dreyfus as the title character.

3. The Constitution and…Myanmar

Earlier this month, Myanmar (formerly known as Burma), the southeast Asian country that has been under military rule for decades, held parliamentary elections. Nobel Peace Prize winner Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the opposition party she led, the National League for Democracy, swept the election.


This week, however, representatives of the National League for Democracy refused to take their newly won seats in parliament in protest of the phrasing of the lawmakers’ oath, which says they will “safeguard the constitution.” The party wants to change the constitution because it grants extensive powers to the military, and wants to replace the word “safeguard” to “respect.”


In the U.S. Constitution, the president and other federal officials promise to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.” Fortunately, that hasn’t prevented Americans from amending the Constitution. But in Myanmar, the war over words could threaten the fragile beginnings of democracy.

But wait, there’s more

Check out the curated links to news and commentary on constitutional issues around the web at or on the sidebar of Constitution Daily. (Note: Links are not endorsements.)


Join the conversation! Catch up on this week’s news, subscribe to the Constitution Daily RSS, or sign up for the email newsletter.


Holly Munson is the Programs Coordinator for Public Engagement at the National Constitution Center.


Sign up for our email newsletter