Below you will find the con argument in our debate on Roe v. Wade and Abortion. The pro argument, written by James A. Montanye, can be found here. Are nearly fifty years of precedent enough to insulate the abortion right established in Roe v. Wade from the challenges posed by restrictive new laws in...
Read More »

This piece is the pro argument in our two-post debate on Roe v. Wade and Abortion. You can find the con argument, written by Graham H. Walker in response to this piece, here. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear an appeal from Mississippi’s restrictive abortion law raises questions and concerns regarding the longstanding desire...
Read More »

In a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court granted injunctive relief to Catholic and Jewish houses of worship affected by an executive order issued by New York governor Andrew Cuomo to battle the spread of the COVID-19. The governor’s order imposed restrictions on attendance at religious services in areas classified as “red” or “orange”...
Read More »

America is experiencing a revolution. But it is a far different revolution than the one we celebrate every Fourth of July. In fact, it has much more in common with the French Revolution of 1789 than the Spirit of 1776. The American Revolution is often called a lawyers’ revolution. This is based on the...
Read More »

As I mentioned in recent commentary for The American Spectator, the states (not the federal government) are charged under our system of government with dealing with the coronavirus. They possess the “police power” and may make laws for the health, welfare, and safety of the people. Chief Justice John Marshall recognized this exclusivity in...
Read More »

On college campuses, the new film No Safe Spaces explains, the First Amendment, intellectual freedom, and the very idea of free speech are under attack with threats, bans, and even violence. That threat has come to the attention of comedian Dave Chapelle, latest winner of the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. Chappelle, 46,...
Read More »

With police and public officials alike, California taxpayers should watch what they do, not what they say.

The law has limits to changing hearts and minds.

This decision limits the power of organized labor and gives greater freedom to individual workers.

This was the right result in this case, but the Court has done little to provide meaningful guidance as free exercise and free speech clash with public accommodation statutes making sexual orientation a protected classification.