In this episode, Christine Chabot of Marquette University Law School and Michael McConnell of Stanford Law School join to discuss Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s termination and the broader legal and constitutional issues it raises, such as the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve and the scope of the president’s removal power. Resources Trump v. Wilcox (2025) Collins v. Yellin (2021) Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (2020) Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935) Christine Chabot, “Is the Federal Reserve Constitutional? An Originalist Argument for Independent Agencies,” Notre Dame Law Review (2020) Michael McConnell, “Opinion: Save the Federal Reserve’s independence by splitting the agency,” Washington Post (September 3, 2025) In our new podcast, Pursuit: The Founders’ Guide to Happiness Jeffrey Rosen explores the founders’ lives with the historians who know them best. Plus, filmmaker Ken Burns shares his daily practice of self-reflection. Follow Pursuit: The Founders’ Guide to Happiness on Apple Podcast and Spotify. Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Explore the America at 250 Civic Toolkit. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work: Donate
In this episode, Bradley Smith of Capital University Law School and Nicholas Stephanopoulos of Harvard Law School join to discuss the history and future of partisan gerrymandering, including the mid-decade redistricting battles of the Gilded Age and the ongoing mid-decade redistricting efforts in Texas and California. Resources Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Nicholas Stephanopoulos, Aligning Election Law (2024) Nicholas Stephanopoulos & Eric McGhee, “Partisan Gerrymandering and the Efficiency Gap,” Chicago Unbound (2014) Bradley Smith, Unfree Speech: The Folly of Campaign Finance Reform (2001) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Sabrina Lynn Motley, director of the Smithsonian Folklife Festival at the Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage, and Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, discuss how their institutions are celebrating America’s 250th birthday. This conversation took place at Chautauqua Institution 2025 Summer Assembly. Resources Jeff Rosen, The Pursuit of Liberty: How Hamilton and Jefferson Ignited the Lasting Battle Over Power in America Chautauqua Institution, Sabrina Lynn Motley and Jeffrey Rosen National Constitution Center, America’s Town Hall Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Bradley Smith of Capital University Law School and Nicholas Stephanopoulos of Harvard Law School join to discuss the history and future of racial gerrymandering, including how the Court’s upcoming decision in Louisiana v. Callais could affect the Voting Rights Act. Resources Louisiana v. Callais (2025) Allen v. Milligan (2023) Shelby County v. Holder (2013) Nicholas Stephanopoulos, Aligning Election Law (2024) Bradley Smith, Unfree Speech: The Folly of Campaign Finance Reform (2001) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Richard Primus of the University of Michigan Law School and John Harrison of the University of Virginia School of Law join to discuss Primus’s new book The Oldest Constitutional Question: Enumeration and Federal Power, which challenges the prevailing understanding of congressional power and argues that Congress is not limited to its textually enumerated powers. Their conversation traces how this fundamental disagreement has shaped key moments in American constitutional history, from the Founding Era to the New Deal, and why the debate remains unsettled today. Resources Richard Primus, The Oldest Constitutional Question: Enumeration and Federal Power (2025) Richard Primus, “’The Essential Characteristic’: Enumerated Powers and the Bank of the United States,” Michigan Law Review (2018) John Harrison, “Enumerated Federal Power and the Necessary and Proper Clause (reviewingThe Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause by Gary Lawson, Geoffrey P. Miller, Robert G. Natelson, Guy I. Seidman),” The University of Chicago Law Review (2011) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Mary Ziegler of the UC Davis School of Law and Stephen Gilles of the Quinnipiac University School of Law join to discuss Ziegler’s new book Personhood: The New Civil War over Reproduction, which explores the history and goals of the anti-abortion movement in the United States. Resources Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) Mary Ziegler, Personhood: The New Civil War over Reproduction (2025) Mary Ziegler, Abortion and Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present (2020) Stephen Gilles, “What Does Dobbs Mean for the Constitutional Right to a Life-or-Health-Preserving Abortion,” Mississippi Law Journal (2023) Stephen Gilles, “Why Fourteenth Amendment Personhood Requires Live Birth,” Notre Dame Journal of Ethics and Public Policy (2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David Levering Lewis joins to unpack Du Bois’ life, legacy, and enduring impact on American history and discuss his new memoir, The Stained Glass Window. Resources David Levering Lewis, The Stained Glass Window: A Family History as the American Story, 1790–1958, (2025) David Levering Lewis, W.E.B. Du Bois: A Biography 1868–1963, (2009) American Historical Association, “W.E.B. Du Bois (1868–1963): Historian, Sociologist, Editor, Activist,” Perspectives on History, (2023) W.E.B. Du Bois, The Talented Tenth, (1903) W.E.B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk: Centennial Edition, (2003) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Derek Black of the University of South Carolina School of Law and Neal McCluskey of the Cato Institute join to discuss this recent emergency docket decision and explore the history of federal involvement in education. Resources McMahon v. New York (2025) Scott Harris with Derek Black, “Trump’s Targeting of Education Department Could Eliminate Dozens of Federal Programs for Millions of Students Nationwide,” Counterpoint (Feb. 10, 2025) Derek Black, “Dangerous Learning: The South’s Long War on Black Literacy,” (2025) Neal McCluskey, “Right Supreme Court Call on Downsizing the US Department of Education,” Cato at Liberty (July 14, 2025) Neal McCluskey, Feds in the Classroom: How Big Government Corrupts, Cripples, and Compromises American Education, (2007) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In this episode, Jess Bravin of The Wall Street Journal, Jan Crawford of CBS News, and Fred Smith Jr. of Stanford Law School join to explore polarization on the Court and the role of the media and the political branches in shaping public perceptions. Resources Trump v. CASA, Inc. (2025) Jess Bravin and Mariah Timms, “Supreme Court Limits Rulings Against Trump on Birthright Citizenship,” The Wall Street Journal (June 27, 2025) Jan Crawford, Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for the Control of the United States Supreme Court (2007) Fred O. Smith, Jr. and Peter O’Neill, “The Forgotten Face of ‘Our Federalism,’” The Yale Law Journal (forthcoming, 2026) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court delivered its final decisions of the 2024–25 term. In this episode, Steve Vladeck of the Georgetown University Law Center and Sarah Isgur of SCOTUSblog join to discuss the significant cases from this Supreme Court term. Resources Trump v. CASA, Inc. (2025) Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025) DHS v. DVD (2025) Steve Vladeck, “163: A New Kind of Judicial Supremacy,” One First (June 30, 2025) Advisory Opinions podcast Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
On June 18, the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law that prohibits medical transitions for transgender minors. In this episode, William Eskridge Jr. of Yale Law School and Christopher Green of The Ohio State University join to debate the decision and to discuss the meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Resources United States v. Skrmetti (2025) Christopher Green, Brief amicus curiae, United States v. Skrmetti (Oct. 15, 2024) William Eskridge, et al., Brief amici curiae, United States v. Skrmetti (Sept. 3, 2024) Geduldig v. Aiello (1974) Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
On June 7, President Trump asserted control over California’s National Guard. In this episode, Professor Michael Ramsey of the University of San Diego School of Law and Liza Goitein of the Brennan Center join Jeffrey Rosen to explore the meaning of 10 U.S.C. 12406 and unpack California Governor Gavin Newsom’s lawsuit challenging the legality of President Trump’s actions. Resources Michael Ramsey, “John Yoo on Presidential Authority to Use the National Guard,” The Originalism Blog (June 13, 2025) Elizabeth Goitein, “Unpacking Trump’s Order Authorizing Domestic Deployment of the Military,” The Brennan Center (June 10, 2025) Elizabeth Goitein, “Preventing Use of National Guard to Evade Posse Comitatus Act,” Center for a New American Security (May 20, 2025) Newsom v. Trump, Northern District of California (June 12, 2025) Martin v. Mott (1827) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Gillian Metzger of Columbia Law School and Saikrishna Prakash of the University of Virginia School of Law join Jeffrey Rosen to examine the founders’ vision for the presidency, review how presidential power has changed over time, and debate the constitutional questions—including the unitary executive theory—that have shaped the modern presidency. Resources Federalist No. 70, New York Packet (March 18, 1788) Myers v. United States (1926) Trump v. United States (2024) Saikrishna Prakash, The Living Presidency: An Originalist Argument Against Its Ever-Expanding Powers, (2020) Saikrishna Prakash, Imperial from the Beginning: The Constitution of the Original Executive, (2015) Gillian Metzger, “Disqualification, Immunity, and the Presidency,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 138 (April 1, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Charles Sumner was an abolitionist senator who helped to write the post-Civil War Constitution and give birth to modern civil rights law. Zaakir Tameez, author of the new biography Charles Sumner: Conscience of a Nation, joins Jeffrey Rosen to discuss Sumner as a moral thinker, political activist, and constitutional visionary. Resources Zaakir Tameez, Charles Sumner: Conscience of a Nation Zaakir Tameez, “What we can learn from the senator who nearly died for democracy,” The Washington Post (June 1, 2025) Richard Kreitner “Charles Sumner Was More Than Just a Guy Who Got Caned on the Senate Floor,” The New York Times (June 2, 2025 Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
In celebration of Jewish American Heritage Month, Richard Kreitner, author of Fear No Pharaoh: American Jews, the Civil War, and the Fight to End Slavery, and Shari Rabin, author of The Jewish South: An American History, join Jeffrey Rosen for a wide-ranging discussion on the Southern Jewish experience from the Revolutionary era to the Civil War. They discuss how American Jews reckoned with religious discrimination and slavery, explore Jewish participation in the Civil War, and remember some of the notable American Jews who helped shape this tumultuous era. This conversation was originally streamed live as part of the NCC’s America’s Town Hall program series on May 29, 2025. It was presented in partnership with the Weitzman National Museum of American Jewish History and in celebration of Jewish American Heritage Month. Resources Richard Kreitner, Fear No Pharaoh: American Jews, the Civil War, and the Fight to End Slavery (2025) Shari Rabin, The Jewish South: An American History (2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Constitutional scholars Ilya Shapiro, Stephen Vladeck, and Adam White join NCC President and CEO Jeffrey Rosen to debate whether the Trump administration has overreached on executive power, analyze the relationship between the federal courts and the president, and put the present moment in historical context. This conversation was originally recorded on May 21, 2025, at George Washington’s Mount Vernon. Resources J. Michael Luttig, “The End of Rule of Law in America,” The Atlantic (May 14, 2025) Stephen Vladeck, “What the Courts Can Still Do to Constrain Trump,” The Atlantic (April 15, 2025) Ilya Shapiro, “Don’t Throw My Executive Power in That Briar Patch!,” Shapiro’s Gavel Substack (April 24, 2025) Adam White, “WTH Is Going On with Birthright Citizenship? Adam White Explains” WTH Is Going On podcast (Jan. 30, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter passed away on May 8, 2025, at his home in New Hampshire. In this episode, his former clerks, Judge Kevin Newsom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen of Harvard Law School, join Jeffrey Rosen for a conversation on Justice Souter’s life and constitutional legacy. Retired Justice Stephen Breyer also shares memories of his former colleague. Resources Jeannie Suk Gersen, “Justice Souter Was the Antithesis of the Present,” The New Yorker (May 15, 2025) Linda Greenhouse, “David H. Souter, Republican Justice Who Allied With Court’s Liberal Wing, Dies at 85,” The New York Times (May 9, 2025) Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) Bush v. Gore (2000) Atwater v. City of Lago Vista (2001) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Brian Kalt of Michigan State College of Law and Jeffrey Toobin, author of The Pardon: The Politics of Presidential Mercy, join Jeffrey Rosen to explore the founders’ vision for the pardon power and the use of the presidential pardon throughout American history—from Thomas Jefferson’s pardons to those issued by Presidents Biden and Trump. This conversation was originally streamed live as part of the NCC’s America’s Town Hall series on March 27, 2025. Resources Jeffrey Toobin, The Pardon: The Politics of Presidential Mercy (2025) Brian Kalt, Constitutional Cliffhangers (2012) Nixon Pardon (Gerald Ford Presidential Library) Trump v. United States (2024) Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 74, New York Packet (March 28, 1788) Abraham Lincoln, “Proclamation 124—Offering Pardon to Deserters” (March 11, 1865) United States v. Klein (1871) Ex parte Garland (1866) Andrew Glass, “Bush pardons Iran-Contra felons, Dec. 24, 1992,” Politico (Dec. 24, 2018) Presidential Records Act Donald Trump, “Granting Pardons and Commutation of Sentences for Certain Offenses Relating to the Events at or Near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” (Jan. 20. 2025) Jimmy Carter, “Proclamation 4483—Granting pardon for violations of the Selective Service Act, August 4, 1964, to March 28, 1973,” (Jan. 21, 1973) Pardons granted by President Barack Obama Pardons granted by President Joe Biden Pardons granted by President Bill Clinton Pardons granted by President Donald Trump Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
On April 30, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond, which examines the constitutionality of religious charter schools. In this episode, Michael McConnell of Stanford Law School and Steven Green of Willamette University join Jeffrey Rosen to recap the oral arguments, debate the meaning and history of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, and survey the Court’s other religion cases from this term. Resources: Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (2021) Carson v. Makin (2022) Michael McConnell and Nathan S. Chapman, Agreeing to Disagree: How the Establishment Clause Protects Religious Diversity and Freedom of Conscience (2023) Steven Green et al. Brief of Historians and Legal Scholars as Amici Curiae In Support of Respondent, Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond Michael McConnell et al. Brief for Amici Curiae Religious Liberty Scholars In Support of Petitioners, Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission Michael McConnell et al. Brief for Professors Douglas Laycock, Richard W. Garnett, Thomas C. Berg, Michael W. McConnell, and David M. Smolin as Amici Curiae In Support of Petitioners, Mahmoud v. Taylor Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
On May 15, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case challenging the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order which seeks to end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants. Legal scholars Gabriel Chin of the University of California, Davis School of Law; Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia School of Law; Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond School of Law; and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School join Jeffrey Rosen to debate the scope of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Resources Gabriel J. Chin and Paul Finkelman, “Birthright Citizenship, Slave Trade Legislation, and the Origins of Federal Immigration Regulation,” UC Davis Law Review (April 8, 2021) Ilan Wurman, “Jurisdiction and Citizenship,” Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No.25-27 (April 14, 2025) Amanda Frost, “The Coming Assault on Birthright Citizenship,” The Atlantic (Jan. 7 2025) Kurt Lash, “Prima Facie Citizenship: Birth, Allegiance and the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause,” SSRN (Feb. 22, 2025) Amanda Frost, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, U.S. House of Representatives (Feb. 25, 2025) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate
Pam
a teacher, and a coach are not paid by the hour. They are salaried! They shouldn't be allowed to pray on school grounds.
Douglas Hart
E up
Pam
"A well regulated militia" is also included in the Amendment, but not discussed.
Nonya Bizness
re: kennedy's dissenting opinion that once you share your cell phone data with your cell provider, you have forfeited privacy of that data, and basing that opinion on some sort of pre-tech precedent, i call bull. i used to pick up the big black at&t dial phone receiver on the wall and a couple neighbors might already be talking on our 'party line'. no one ever alleged that a party line imbued law enforcement or the government with the right to bug my phone without a warrant. before my time, the operator was on the line when you picked up your phone and you asked her to connect you to your party. her being on the line, with the ability to listen in on your call, was never a basis for government to also listen in without a warrant. your phone is not only a method for traditionally protected private communication, but is also the repository for modern day "papers and effects". "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searc
Nonya Bizness
the text is very clear. that the court has watered it down in the past with 'exceptions' does not dilute the clear meaning of the amendment. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." "unreasonable" is virtually defined in the text as being warrantless. a warrant is presupposed as the baseline for reasonable, by virtue of the word "and". our constitutional protections have been so sliced and diced that now we have this discussion of whether a government agent can literally walk into your house at will, without any articulated cause at all.