A Living Constitution Provides No Stability

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

I’ve written a lot regarding the Constitution over the years – although not usually two days in row. Most times the topic boils down to a choice between the stability of originalism or the chaos of the co-called “living document.” This has been a great debate since the dawn of the progressive era.

In 2006 Elliott Mincberg, the vice president of the ultra lefty group “People for the American Way” said: “It was the framers intent that the Constitution would adapt to changing circumstances.” In other words, a living Constitution.

Most would be surprised that, in my opinion, the founders would agree with Mr. Mincberg – although I guarantee they would not agree with his method of change.

That same year Todd Gaziono of the Heritage Foundation said: “Original intent is the only legitimate means of interpretation under our written Constitution and all other philosophies are illegitimate.” Mr. Gaziono is also correct.

Okay, both can’t be correct. Obviously the “living Constitution” crowd is wrong because, as we all know, the left has no desire to amend the Constitution. They instead see fit to usurp the Constitution by means of laws, court precedents and presidential decrees.  read more

Treat the Constitution Like the NFL Rulebook

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

What does it mean when we right-wingers describe ourselves as conservatives? What is it that we are trying so hard to save, preserve or prevent the loss of – which is what conserve means. Those on the left would say we wish to conserve the days of slavery and Jim Crow – or maybe the white-old days of the 1950s before the Civil Rights movement.

Despite the fact that all those bad times were born of the left in this country, we conservatives wish to reestablish and conserve America’s original set of governing rules.

Our nation was founded on a set of ideals – the Declaration of Independence, and rules – the Constitution. Yet Americans today seem only to care about some rules, but not others. We demand absolute adherence to some rule books, while all but ignoring others.

As most of my readers know, I’m a huge fan of the NFL – particularly the New England Patriots, but also just a lover of everything pro-football. (Don’t hate me just because your team isn’t as good).

On many occasions, I’ve witnessed that we, at least we football fans, will have a nationwide collective meltdown, if say a player commits a penalty and gets away with it late in the fourth quarter of a close game. Fans take to Twitter, Instagram and Facebook to vent their spleens over a flagrant violation that goes unpunished and may cost their team the game. read more

WND Exclusive – Are you, too, a ‘Declarationist’?

1864 Two Cent Coin

Memorial Day has come and gone. I hope you all sought out the family of one of our fallen heroes or at least said a prayer on their behalf.

Now we’re into summer, though not technically, and America’s next great celebration is on the horizon – that of our nation’s independence.

We in America, and certainly us political wonks, write and speak constantly of the United States Constitution. We may do so often that it can sometimes seem tiresome to listen to – even for other fans of the Constitution. Not that I hear this from my friends and family or anything. read more

The Right to Bear the Constitution – or at Least Review It

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Many Americans suffer from a common phobia. No, it’s not the very reasonable fear of Democrats running the country. That’s not a phobia, for its not irrational. No, they suffer from an irrational fear of guns. Guns are not inherently scary. They are just a tool – like a screwdriver or a leaf-blower. You’ve heard the saying, the right tool for the right job. You wouldn’t use a gun to blow the leaves around your yard and thus you wouldn’t use a leaf blower to defend yourself. You could try, but I’ll bet it won’t go well.

Yet over the years more and more citizens have been purposely conditioned to think guns are scary. Thus the “Gun Free Zone” was established. These days there are more and more “gun free zones” than ever.

Yet economist John Lott found that, “Since at least 1950, all but two public mass shootings in America have taken place where general citizens are banned from carrying guns. In Europe, there have been no exceptions. Every mass public shooting — and there have been plenty of mass shootings in Europe — has occurred in a gun-free zone.”

Bet you won’t hear that fun fact from the anti-gun lobby.

We hear that restaurants like Starbucks, Chipotle and Panera Bread and chain stores like Target have become gun free zones. Yes, Target allows men and little girls in the same dressing area, but won’t allow guns. Ask a mother or father which is scarier – a law abiding person with a gun, or a creepy old man watching their daughter undress.

Although it’s a stupid policy, I agree with them. They are private businesses and have the freedom to invoke such a policy. read more

The People Must Regain the Consent of the Governed

by: the Common Constitutionalist

No Audio Version

We often hear, especially from the left, arguments either for or against American democracy. If you’re like me, every time I hear the word democracy mentioned as the correct form of American government, I roll my eyes and wonder if the politician or pundit is purposely trying to plant the notion in the viewer’s or listener’s mind that this is in fact our form of government, or do they just not know we have a representative republic.

I fear that in a lot of cases they just don’t understand the difference, despite being “Representatives” themselves.

Dr Larry Arnn and some students at Hillsdale College briefly covered this very topic in Hillsdale’s new online course – “Introduction to the Constitution.” Specifically, it was lesson five entitled, “Representation of the People.”

I would invite and encourage everyone to watch these short presentations and discussions, for this is not your average Introduction to the Constitution. They cover some pretty heady stuff. There are 12 segments, or mini-courses, averaging only about 9 minutes in length.

Watching these videos also allows for a fascinating juxtaposition of the knowledge of Hillsdale students vs. the pampered know-nothing snowflake variety from “mainstream” and supposed elite schools.

Having thrown off rule by the King of England, the founders had to decide on a form of national of federal government. Their choices were of course, a monarchy, a democracy or a representative republic. Obviously they were not going to return to rule by monarch, but a democracy, as attractive as this sounds, where everyone has a voice and a vote, was utterly impractical. In order to accomplish anything, every citizen would have to be present for every vote. This was as unworkable then as it would be today.
There was no way of assembling all Americans in one place every time a vote was required. read more

There is Little Risk in an Article V Convention of States

By: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

It’s not often that I disagree with my fellow conservative authors. And if I do, I rarely if ever outwardly express that disagreement. But I’m making an exception to voice my disappointment of one “conservative” author who wrote about the potential “dangers” of an Article V Convention of States.

The article is entitled “A Convention of States is Not Without Risks.”

Right off the bat, I thought – oh here we go – another attempt at persuading the less informed of the dangers of an out-of control, free-for all, convention. As if anyone can propose anything and the idiot States will just line up in favor, like so many lemmings.

The author begins by attempting to win over the right, by writing that, “Patriots and Constitutional Conservatives across America are sickened and disgusted by our Federal Court Judges and our Cowardly Congress filled with ‘Demon-crats and RINO’s’ who have largely ignored the will and wishes of the citizens and voters for decades.”

This of course will cause “Constitutional Conservatives” to stand up and cheer.

But then he ventures down the road that many fearmongers have by stating that, “We must recognize however, that there will be ‘deep blue liberal’ states present at any such Convention; Deep Blue New York, for example, is, alongside Deep Red Texas are two of the eleven states whose legislatures have called for a Convention of States.”

The 11 States that have made application are, in no particular order, AK, GA, FL, ND, TN, LA, AL, IN, MO, OK, AZ, and of course TX. Funny, but I don’t see NY there. read more

It’s Time Someone Slapped Down the Rogue Federal Courts

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

On Wednesday, at a rally in Nashville, president Trump proclaimed that, “A judge has just blocked our Executive Order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries….We’re going to fight this terrible ruling. We’re going to take our case as far as it needs to go including all the way up to the supreme Court. The danger is clear – the law is clear – the need for my Executive order is clear…”

Trump has now been blocked multiple times by lower court judges.

So what does he or anyone intend to do about it? It appears he intends to fight this all way to the high court – or should I say, the black-robed legislators. And then what?

This is how far we’ve strayed from the Constitution and the design of the federal judicial branch’s authority. All on the right are wailing about the courts clearly overstepping their bounds, but from what I’ve heard and seen thus far, no one has offered a solution. read more

So Who is Really in Charge of Immigration

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

It’s obvious and has been demonstrated repeatedly as of late, that the Democrat Party cares less for American citizens than it does for foreign visitors and illegal immigrants.

The Party has also exhibited a willingness to flaunt or outright break the law in doing so.

Being that the Common Constitutionalist is not an actual Constitutional scholar, I cannot say for certain if President Trump’s temporary ban of people from seven foreign nations is or is not Constitutional – anymore than I can say Obama’s was. But I can read…and think.

However, the larger and longer lasting issue is that of illegal immigration, and States and cities refusal to follow federal law. However some would consider this a gray area.

If one were to look to the Constitution, which should always be first consulted, we would see that the word immigration doesn’t appear anywhere. What does is Article I, Section 8, clause 4, which states that, “Congress shall have the Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…” read more

There is a Way to Override the Supreme Court

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Yesterday, I posted an article regarding those on the left whining about the lack of a ninth supreme Court justice. You may review it here.

The author of the piece I quoted went so far as to accuse the Republican Senate of being “nothing less than an existential threat to the supreme Court,” for not confirming, or at least voting on Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. As if this is their duty to accommodate our beloved president, despite the Constitution making no such assertion.

This is the frustration, or impatience of the left. They can wait no longer to pack the high Court with leftists, giving them the means to finally transform America into the socialist utopia they’ve been dreaming of.

But the frustration of the right always seems to end up back at that dastardly decision, Marbury v. Madison (1803), which was the first U.S. supreme Court case to apply the principle of “judicial review,” giving it the power to void acts of Congress that they feel are in conflict with the Constitution.

Over the years, the Marbury v. Madison decision has seen judicial review morph into the high Court becoming the final arbiter regarding all things – legal, social and cultural.

The federal Courts, including the supreme Court, were not designed, under Article III, to adjudicate everything as they seem to today. The federal courts were set up specifically to deal with federal issues, beyond the scope of State Courts. These issues are described in Article III of the Constitution. read more

My WND Weekly Exclusive

Obama’s gay national monument

Congratulations, America – we now have our first homosexual national monument. While America and the world are all caught up in the drama that is Brexit, Obama has declared a gay bar in Greenwich Village, NYC, a national monument under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service.

Yep – tearing down our society one brick at a time.

The Stonewall Inn was a homosexual hangout in the ’60s. In 1969 police raided the joint, and riots ensued. From then on it has become known as the birthplace of the homosexual movement – as there was no LGBTQ back then. They were just cross-dressers and didn’t spend their time “questioning.” read more