The Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture publication

A recent federal appellate court ruling holding that a school must allow a girl who identifies as male to use the boys’ restroom gets nearly everything wrong.

There’s plenty of room for a Republican presidential candidate to reject the Obama administration’s extremist ideology on the question of transgender identity.

The Supreme Court’s extraordinary abuses, as manifested most recently in its invention of a supposed constitutional right to same-sex marriage, call for careful consideration of extraordinary responses.

The list of possible living-constitutionalist rewritings of the real Constitution is endless.

How Americans respond in the coming months and years to the Supreme Court’s gay marriage ruling will reveal much about who we think we are — and about what America will become.

Some libertarians sometimes invite the suspicion that their commitment to originalism is opportunistic—that, for them, originalism is something to be invoked and to be twisted, this way and that, to constitutionalize their policy preferences.

We live in a legal culture besotted by the myth of judicial supremacy. A new book on the Constitution dispels with admirable clarity this and other myths.

The tools of modern political science are not capable of generating meaningful insights into whether in-group bias affects judicial decision-making.

Justice Ginsburg’s gratuitous comments about the marriage cases pending before the Supreme Court are unethical and should require her recusal.

Senator Rand Paul makes a bad case in support of “judicial activism.”

The Ninth Circuit — the federal appellate court long notorious for its lawlessness — should conduct a thorough investigation into whether its process of assigning judges to cases has been abused for ideological purposes.

State attorneys general who fail to defend state marriage laws violate their ethical duties and undermine the rule of law.