We the People

In this episode, Robert Post, Sterling Professor of Law at Yale Law School, delves into his newly released and highly anticipated volumes from the Oliver Wendell Holmes Devise History of the Supreme Court, The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921–1930. Post explores the history of the Taft Court and the contrasting constitutional approaches among its justices, including Chief Justice Taft, Louis Brandeis, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and the infamous James McReynolds. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program was originally streamed live as part of our America’s Town Hall series on December 11, 2023. Resources: Robert Post, The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921–1930 Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) Chas. Wolff Packing Co. v. Court of Ind. Relations, 262 U.S. 522 (1923) Whitney v. California (1927) Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) Gitlow v. New York (1925) Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected].   Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

On Tuesday, December 4, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Moore v. United States. The case concerns a challenge to the “mandatory repatriation tax,” and asks whether the Constitution allows Congress to tax American shareholders for the unrealized earnings of a foreign corporation. In this episode, Akhil Amar of Yale Law School and Anastasia Boden of the Cato Institute join Jeffrey Rosen to break down the arguments on both sides of the case. The conversation touches on the history of taxation in the Founding era, the extent of Congressional power, and the very meaning of the word “taxation.” Resources: Anastasia Boden, Amicus Brief for Petitioners, Moore v. United States Akhil Amar and Vikram Amar, Amicus Brief for Respondents, Moore v. United States Moore v. United States (oral argument via C-SPAN) Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

On Wednesday, November 29, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. The case involves three constitutional challenges to the agency, involving the right to a jury trial; the nondelegation doctrine; and the scope of executive power. In this episode, Noah Rosenblum, assistant professor of law at NYU, and Ilan Wurman, assistant professor at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, join Jeffrey Rosen to break down the arguments in the case, which pits the federal regulatory agency against a hedge fund manager charged with securities violations. They break down the constitutional claims at play, and discuss how the case could affect the future of the SEC and the modern administrative state as we know it. Resources: SEC v. Jarkesy (oral argument via CSPAN; transcript) Noah Rosenblum, “The Case That Could Destroy the Government,” The Atlantic (Nov. 27, 2023) Ilan Wurman, Brief in Support of Neither Party, SEC v. Jarkesy Ilan Wurman, “Nondelegation at the Founding” (Yale L.J. 2021) Julian Davis Mortenson & Nicholas Bagley, “Delegation at the Founding,” (Columbia L.Rev. 2021) Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected].  Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

Last week the Supreme Court announced that it adopted a formal code of ethics, endorsed by all nine Justices. In this episode, Professor Daniel Epps of Washington University School of Law and Professor Stephen Vladeck of the University of Texas School of Law join Jeffrey Rosen to break down the Supreme Court ethics code and explore questions about how it will be applied and enforced. Resources: Supreme Court of the United States, Statement of the Court Regarding the Code of Conduct, Nov. 13, 2023 Daniel Epps and Will Baude, “Easy Win,” Divided Argument (podcast) Steve Vladeck, “One and a Half Cheers for the Supreme Court,” One First substack, Nov. 16, 2023. Steve Vladeck, “Opinion: The Supreme Court code of conduct misses this big thing,” CNN, Nov. 14, 2023 Steve Vladeck, “An Article III Inspector-General,” One First substack, Oct. 19, 2023. Epps, Daniel and Trammell, Alan M., “The False Promise of Jurisdiction Stripping” (March 8, 2023). Columbia Law Review, Forthcoming. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected].  Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

Historians Ned Blackhawk and Brenda Child join for a conversation on Blackhawk’s national bestseller, The Rediscovery of America: Native Peoples and the Unmaking of U.S. History, which just won the National Book Award. They explore five centuries of U.S. history to shed light on the central role Indigenous peoples have played in shaping our nation’s narrative. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program was streamed live on November 1, 2023. Resources: Ned Blackhawk, The Rediscovery of America: Native Peoples and the Unmaking of U.S. History   Brenda Child, Away From Home: American Indian Boarding School Experiences, 1879-2000 Brenda Child, Boarding School Seasons: American Indian Families, 1900-1940 Claudio Saunt, Unworthy Republic: The Dispossession of Native Americans and the Road to Indian Territory Jeffrey Ostler, Surviving Genocide: Native Nations and the United States from the American Revolution to Bleeding Kansas Eric Foner, The Second Founding: How the Civil War and Reconstruction Remade the Constitution Ned Blackhawk, Violence over the Land: Indians and Empires in the early American West Brenda Child, Holding Our World Together: Ojibwe Women and the Survival of Community Brenda Child, My Grandfather's Knocking Sticks: Ojibwe Family Life and Labor on the Reservation Brenda Child and Brian Klopotek, Indian Subjects: Hemispheric Perspectives on the History of Indigenous Education Michael Witgen, Seeing Red: Indigenous Land, American Expansion, and the Political Economy of Plunder in North America Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected].  Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

This week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a Second Amendment case, United States v. Rahimi. This case asks whether the federal government can ban guns for people subject to domestic-violence restraining orders. In this episode, we break down the arguments in the case and explore the future of the Second Amendment. Clark Neily of the Cato Institute and Pepperdine Law Professor Jacob Charles join Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, to discuss. Resources: United States v. Rahimi, Oral Argument (C-SPAN) NY State Pistol and Rifle Assn. v Bruen (2021) Judge Kavanaugh dissent, D.C. v. Heller (D.C. Cir. 2011) Clark Neily, Brief in Support of Respondent, United States v. Rahimi Jacob Charles (et al), Brief of Second Amendment Scholars in Support of Petitioner, United States v. Rahimi Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected].  Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.  Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.  You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library. 

This week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases about social media and the First Amendment. The cases involve questions surrounding when and whether a public official’s social media activity constitutes state action subject to First Amendment constraints—and if so, whether they can block individuals from their social media pages. In this episode, David Cole of the ACLU and Professor Eugene Volokh of UCLA Law join to break down the arguments in both cases, discuss the claims being made, and how the outcomes of the cases could contribute to further defining the scope of speech rights online. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources: Lindke v. Freed, Oral Argument (CSPAN) O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, Oral Argument (CSPAN) Eugene Volokh, When Is Government Official's Blocking Commenter from Social Media Page "State Action"?, Volokh Conspiracy (June 2022) David Cole / Brief of the ACLU et al in support of respondents, O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier David Cole / Brief of ACLU et al in support of petitioner, Lindke v.Freed Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

This week we are sharing an episode from our companion podcast, Live at the National Constitution Center. In this episode, prize-winning historians Kate Masur, author of Until Justice Be Done: America’s First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction, and Dylan Penningroth, author of the new book Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights, explore the central role of African Americans in the struggle for justice and equality long before the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources: Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America’s First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction (2022) Dylan Penningroth, Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights (2023) Article IV, Section 2: Movement Of Persons Throughout the Union, Privileges and Immunities Clause, National Constitution Center’s Interactive Constitution 14th Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause, National Constitution Center’s Interactive Constitution Dylan Penningroth, The Claims of Kinfolk: African American Property and Community in the Nineteenth-Century South (2003) Kate Masur, An Example for All the Land: Emancipation and the Struggle over Equality in Washington, D.C (2010) Brief of Professors of History and Law as Amici Curia in Support of Respondents, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard and UNC Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

This week we are sharing an episode from our companion podcast, Live at the National Constitution Center. In this episode, these three leading experts on American presidents—Sidney Milkis and Barbara Perry of the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, and Stephen Knott of Ashland University—warn about the increasingly demagogic nature of the presidency. Their discussion traces a historical journey, from George Washington, who governed as a neutral and unifying officeholder, to modern presidents—from Teddy Roosevelt to FDR and Woodrow Wilson onward—who fanned populist passions. They also offer solutions for how to restore the Framers’ vision of the constitutional presidency today. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources: Stephen Knott, The Lost Soul of the American Presidency: The Decline into Demagoguery and the Prospects for Renewal (2020) Nicholas Jacobs and Sidney Milkis, What Happened to the Vital Center?: Presidentialism, Populist Revolt, and the Fracturing of America (2022) Michael Nelson and Barbara Perry, The Presidency: Facing Constitutional Crossroads (Miller Center Studies on the Presidency) (2021) Stephen Knott, Coming to Terms with John F. Kennedy (2022) Sidney Milkis, Theodore Roosevelt, the Progressive Party, and the Transformation of American Democracy (2009) Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

In its most recent round of redistricting, the South Carolina legislature changed the demographic of a congressional district, resulting in a number of Black voters being moved to a different district. Challengers argued that the state violated the 14th Amendment by unlawfully racially gerrymandering the district; while lawmakers countered that political, not racial, factors motivated the redistricting. Election law experts Rick Hasen of UCLA Law and Jason Torchinsky of the Holtzman Vogel law firm, join National Constitution Center President and CEO Jeffrey Rosen to break down this week’s oral arguments in the case, discuss the claims being made, and how the Court might evaluate them. Resources: Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP (oral argument audio / transcript) Brief of Amicus Curae Nancy Mace, et al, in support of appellants (Jason Torchinsky, counsel of record) Brief of Amicus Curae the National Republican Redistricting Trust in support of appellants (Holtzman Vogel, counsel of record) “The Supreme Court upholds the provision prohibiting racial gerrymandering,”NPR Interview with Richard Hasen (June 2023) Richard Hasen, A Real Right to Vote: How a Constitutional Amendment Can Safeguard American Democracy (forthcoming 2024) “Redistricting in Alabama and the Voting Rights Act—Part 2,” We the People podcast (Oct. 2022) “Recapping Allen v. Milligan: The Court Upholds Section 2 of the VRA,” We the People podcast (June 2023) Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]. Continue today’s conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in ourMedia Library.