The hottest Constitutional Law Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics

Can Constitutions Limit Government?

Fake Noûs • 348 implied HN points • 09 Nov 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Many people believe constitutions limit government powers, but in reality, governments often operate outside these limits. Most actions by the government are not authorized by the Constitution.
  2. One big reason the Constitution fails is that there's no one to enforce its rules against the government. It's like letting robbers control the police; they won't enforce laws against themselves.
  3. To make a better constitution, we might need new ideas, like requiring a supermajority to pass laws or having a special court to deal with constitutional issues. This could help protect people's rights from government overreach.

Thoughts on Megachurches and Taxes

I Might Be Wrong • 11 implied HN points • 30 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. If the government gets to decide which groups count as "real" religion, it gains dangerous power to reward or punish beliefs, so religious neutrality is essential.
  2. Tax-exempt status for churches and nonprofits is messy because "doing good" is a vague category that can be gamed, and strict enforcement would force the government to make value judgments it shouldn’t have to make.
  3. A more consistent tax approach would be to tax individuals rather than organizations, but shifting taxes onto people would be politically unpopular because it removes the hidden costs voters currently accept.

Updating the Constitution

God's Spies by Thomas Neuburger • 110 implied HN points • 20 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The U.S. Constitution has flaws that let a small number of people hold a lot of power. This can affect how fair and representative the government is for everyone.
  2. Various groups have changed the Constitution over the years, impacting democracy and people's rights. This includes influences from security measures, economic policies, and executive powers.
  3. There’s a push to make the unofficial changes to the Constitution official. This could lead to big shifts in how laws are applied or understood in the country.

READING: Hamilton's Constitutional Convention Speech

Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality • 153 implied HN points • 17 Jan 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Hamilton believed that weak state governments could harm a strong federal government. He thought a perfect government needed clear powers and strong institutions.
  2. He was worried that pure democracy could lead to chaos and tyranny. Instead, he preferred a system where some leaders held power for a longer time to ensure stability.
  3. Hamilton highlighted that the interests of states often clash with the needs of the entire nation. He suggested a government structure that aligns individual and national interests better.

January 6th was Successful

Unpopular Front • 114 implied HN points • 06 Jan 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The January 6th attack on the Capitol was seen as a political success for Trump. Even after the chaos, he managed to rally support among his followers.
  2. Trump's approach has shifted the political landscape, making opposition seem less credible. Some critics are now viewed as supportive of him, whether they realize it or not.
  3. There is a sense that Trump's actions have broken the systems of law and norms, leading to a more raw and partisan political environment, where traditional standards no longer apply.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

The Courts and the Will of the People

Fisted by Foucault • 123 implied HN points • 14 Nov 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The judiciary holds significant power in government as it can strike down laws, which can complicate the legislative process. This means popular reforms can be blocked by court decisions.
  2. Western democracies are designed with checks and balances, but political divisions often create gridlock, preventing necessary changes. This gridlock can last for years, leaving citizens frustrated.
  3. The influence of those who control the judiciary can overshadow the elected legislative body. This raises concerns about who really has the power in a democracy.

It's not easy from here

Gray Mirror • 112 implied HN points • 02 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Focusing on the wrong targets can lead to wasted effort. It's important to identify and direct energy towards the right problems instead of getting distracted by less significant issues.
  2. Political systems can change, but restoring the past often ignores the unique challenges of today. Acknowledging how history shapes our current situation is key to moving forward.
  3. There's a need to rethink how power is used in government. Rather than trying to go back to what worked before, it might be better to find new solutions that fit our current realities.

Jack Smith seeks to dismiss the cases against Trump

The Reactionary • 93 implied HN points • 25 Nov 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Jack Smith wants to dismiss the criminal cases against Trump, saying that a sitting president can't be prosecuted. This means Trump might not face these charges anymore.
  2. The Supreme Court decided that Trump is immune from being prosecuted for some actions he took as president. This ruling was a big win for Trump.
  3. If the cases are dismissed without being able to be filed again, there could be questions about the Statute of Limitations and future prosecutions. Trump may want to pardon himself to avoid any future legal troubles.

Juror egos and juror ids

Adam's Legal Newsletter • 79 implied HN points • 18 Feb 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Evidence law encompasses a wide range of interests from complex puzzles to civil rights questions.
  2. The Supreme Court deals with Confrontation Clause cases that involve the admissibility of evidence.
  3. Decisions involving juries and evidence can be complex, requiring a balance between legal principles and practical considerations.

The Widening Gyre

Gideon's Substack • 57 implied HN points • 20 Jan 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. There's a big difference between law and sheer power. Law can be understood and followed, while totalitarian regimes can do whatever they want without following the law.
  2. Biden's declaration about the Equal Rights Amendment raises questions. If he can declare something to be law just because he believes it, then what prevents future presidents from doing the same with their own beliefs?
  3. The whole situation might just be for show and not really change anything. This can make people lose trust in what the law actually is and think it's just about who has the most power.

July 9, 2025

Letters from an American • 22 implied HN points • 10 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The Fourteenth Amendment was created to protect the rights of Black Americans after the Civil War, ensuring they are recognized as citizens and granting them equality under the law.
  2. This amendment gave the federal government power to protect individuals from state laws that could be discriminatory, making it crucial for civil rights advancements.
  3. Today, some politicians and judges are challenging the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment, which could lead to fewer rights for individuals in areas like voting, marriage, and personal freedoms.

Join me in fighting for your rights (and mine)

Unreported Truths • 41 implied HN points • 14 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The Constitution is important for protecting individuals from government overreach. It's a written promise that outlines the rights of the people and states.
  2. Recent court rulings show that judges can stand up against the government's attempts to expand its power beyond what the Constitution allows. This helps maintain the balance of power.
  3. To preserve our rights, we need to actively defend the Constitution. It's essential to keep fighting for the freedoms it grants us, as they can be lost if we don't.

The Efficacy and Constitutionality of the Debt Ceiling

QTR’s Fringe Finance • 22 implied HN points • 23 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The debt ceiling doesn't really help control government spending. Instead of a strict limit, we should look at reviewing and approving spending more carefully.
  2. There's a belief that the Constitution may not allow for default on public debt. So, some argue that the president could ignore the debt ceiling if Congress keeps spending money.
  3. Many experts think that the repeated struggle over the debt ceiling does more harm than good for the economy and suggest it's time to get rid of it altogether.

Birthright Citizenship Will be Overturned

Who is Robert Malone • 22 implied HN points • 10 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. President Trump plans to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. This would change the current law that grants citizenship to all babies born in the U.S.
  2. The 14th Amendment has a key phrase, 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' which many believe should limit citizenship based on the parents' legal status.
  3. There is a strong opinion that Congress can clarify the 14th Amendment to exclude children of illegal aliens, signaling a big shift in immigration policy in the coming years.

ADDENDUM J: The Dormancy of the Suspension Clause – A Constitutional Emergency Provision Courts Refuse to Apply

Autodidact Obsessions • 8 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The Suspension Clause of the Constitution allows for temporary suspension of legal protections during invasions or rebellions. However, courts today often ignore modern threats that qualify for this action.
  2. Judicial decisions have made it hard for the government to respond to illegal immigration and foreign threats. This lack of action weakens national security and gives foreign criminals more rights than U.S. citizens.
  3. There is a call for Congress and the Executive to clarify how the Suspension Clause applies to current threats. Courts need to acknowledge these dangers so that the necessary constitutional measures can be used effectively.

Invasion USA

Autodidact Obsessions • 8 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Judicial decisions are complicating how the U.S. can protect itself from foreign threats. They require lengthy individual hearings for people illegally inside the country, making it harder to respond quickly.
  2. The unclear legal situation means the government struggles to tell the difference between regular migrants and potential dangers. This creates big security risks for the country.
  3. Experts believe that these legal rulings might undermine the U.S.'s basic right to defend itself. They call for changes in the law or interpretations to restore the balance of power and national security.

Today's the day! Join the Unreported Truths team!

Unreported Truths • 18 implied HN points • 03 Dec 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Unreported Truths focuses on straightforward, no-frills journalism that aims to inform readers about important issues without commercial distractions.
  2. It aims to protect the rights of unvaccinated individuals and challenge potential government overreach regarding free speech.
  3. The platform keeps content mostly free, relying on reader support to maintain its operations and provide accessible information to everyone.

On “Disagreement” and the Presidential Power to Adjourn Congress

QTR’s Fringe Finance • 16 implied HN points • 19 Nov 24
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The president has a constitutional power to adjourn Congress, but this power has never been used before. It's a rare and complex topic with many possible interpretations.
  2. If the president tries to adjourn Congress without proper disagreement between the House and Senate, it might not be seen as valid. Both houses need to clearly express their disagreement for it to count.
  3. Using this presidential power could lead to a serious constitutional crisis. The Senate could ignore a presidential adjournment, causing confusion and potential court challenges.

Invasion USA: With All Addendums

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Invasion occurs when a group of foreigners enters a country and undermines that country's authority. It's not about individual reasons but the collective impact of the group and its backers.
  2. There are phases to this invasion. First, a small group secures a foothold, and then larger groups follow, often leading to a shift in local control and politics.
  3. Legal systems can slow down any response to such invasions. Each individual's case can take years in court, making it hard to act against the larger threat to a nation's sovereignty.

ADDENDUM P: The Semantic Collapse of “Invasion” and the Constitutional Consequences of Legal Denial

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The concept of 'invasion' is too narrowly defined in legal terms today, making it hard to deal with modern security threats. We need to rethink what 'invasion' means to include more than just traditional military attacks.
  2. Current legal interpretations don't cover many real threats we face, like undercover paramilitary groups or cyber-attacks. This limits the government's ability to respond effectively to those threats.
  3. To protect the Constitution and ensure national security, we should redefine 'invasion' to include any attempts to harm the country, even if the attackers aren't wearing uniforms or are acting in disguise.

ADDENDUM O: THE PARADOXES OF POLICE POWER, JUDICIAL SELF-UNDERMINING, AND SOVEREIGNTY

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The judiciary relies on U.S. sovereignty to function, but when it blocks the Executive's actions against foreign threats, it weakens its own authority.
  2. Judicial rules requiring due process can slow down enforcement efforts, allowing adversaries to take advantage of the system and create zones of lawlessness.
  3. When courts prevent the government from removing foreign actors, they unintentionally accept their presence and power, which undermines U.S. sovereignty.

ADDENDUM L: Constitutional Doctrines Under Assault and the Path to Restoration

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Illegal immigrants have more legal protections than American citizens, making it hard for the government to enforce immigration laws.
  2. Current judicial decisions are weakening the structure of the Constitution, leading to more issues like illegal entry and crime without consequences.
  3. To fix these problems, changes in laws and court practices are needed to ensure that the Constitution works effectively for citizens.

ADDENDUM G: Constitutional Inequality in Enforcement – Citizens vs. Non-Citizens

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. There is a legal double standard that gives more protection to non-citizens compared to U.S. citizens. This means that undocumented immigrants can sometimes avoid harsher penalties that citizens would face for similar actions.
  2. Citizens often have fewer rights when it comes to processes like detention or bond hearings. They may be held longer and with less due process compared to non-citizens who are given quicker hearings.
  3. This inequality in how laws are applied can harm trust in the legal system and impact how citizens view their own rights. It suggests that the system is not treating everyone equally under the law.

ADDENDUM F: State Nullification and Constitutional Breakdown in Federal Immigration Enforcement

Autodidact Obsessions • 4 implied HN points • 21 May 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. States are creating laws that ignore federal immigration rules, which disrupts how immigration laws are enforced and can lead to dangerous situations.
  2. Sanctuary policies can create a two-tier legal system, making some areas safer than others and allowing illegal activities to continue unchecked.
  3. When courts do not enforce federal supremacy in immigration, it leads to a breakdown of the law, making it harder for the government to keep the country secure.

💺First Class Rights

UnfairNation by Ehsan Zaffar • 3 implied HN points • 01 Jul 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Legal protections may now vary based on where you live and your financial ability to hire a lawyer, making them less accessible for many people.
  2. Changes in government policies can create lasting issues that are hard to fix even if they are later ruled unconstitutional.
  3. The recent Supreme Court ruling makes constitutional rights seem more like a privilege that only some can afford, rather than something that protects everyone equally.

Everything you always wanted to know about a government shutdown

Matt’s Five Points • 19 implied HN points • 02 Dec 21
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. A government shutdown happens when Congress doesn't pass new budget laws, leading to a funding gap. This means the government can't spend money on things like salaries and supplies.
  2. During a shutdown, not all federal workers stop working. Some are deemed essential and continue their duties, but they won't get paid until the budget is approved.
  3. Shutdowns can affect different parts of the government differently. Some agencies might keep operating if they have non-appropriated funds, while others come to a halt.

Let's Get Ready To Rumble

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 17 May 19
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Political conflict is normal in a democracy, and we shouldn't be afraid of it. The U.S. system encourages disagreements between branches of government as a way to check power.
  2. Congress has the most control and authority, but it often faces challenges in maintaining that power. It can keep the president in check, but it struggles to fund itself properly.
  3. Public opinion is very important in political battles. Congress and the president respond to public views, using them to gain support or avoid backlash when pushing their agendas.

Matt's Five Points, October 19, 2018 — Constitutional Hardball

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 19 Oct 18
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Constitutional hardball is when legal political strategies push the boundaries of accepted norms. It can be risky, as it may lead to larger conflicts and weaken institutions like the Supreme Court.
  2. The statehood process in the U.S. is easy to manipulate and can disrupt political balance. This flexibility once caused major tensions, particularly regarding issues like slavery in the 19th century.
  3. Lame-duck sessions in Congress can actually be quite productive, with significant legislation often passing during this time. The upcoming session could see important decisions being made, especially if party control changes.

Common sense

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 20 Mar 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The debate around the ACA focuses on its constitutionality and how it could affect future federal power. People are unsure if Congress can have unlimited power or if there are laws that should remain off-limits.
  2. There are two main views of the Constitution: one says it strictly limits government power, while the other suggests that over time, the government has expanded its powers. Both views seem reasonable to many.
  3. Finding common sense is crucial in legal decisions. If a law feels unreasonable or goes against what people believe is right, it can lead to public distrust in the legal system, no matter what the actual law says.

Friday Procedure Blogging: Adjournment vs. Recess

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 27 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. A recess is a short break where the Senate can come back to business right where it left off, while an adjournment means the Senate officially ends its business for the day and starts fresh when it meets again.
  2. The difference between these terms can affect how the Senate operates. For example, in a recess, Senators can only speak a limited number of times, while a new legislative day after an adjournment allows for different rules.
  3. Senate leaders choose between recess and adjournment based on strategy, like avoiding lengthy debates or regaining control when things get chaotic.

The Great Recess-ion

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 13 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Right now, we have a unique situation where different parties control the House and Senate. This makes it tricky for the government to function smoothly and affects how appointments are made.
  2. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is a new agency, which means there are rules about how people can be appointed that differ from other roles. This complicates filling important positions.
  3. Recess appointments aren't as powerful as many think. They can be strategic tools for presidents, but using them can also limit their long-term influence, especially when it comes to judicial appointments.

You down with OLC?

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 12 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The Office of Legal Counsel released an opinion about recess appointments, arguing that recent ones were made during a valid recess. They believe this argument is important for transparency.
  2. OLC opinions are more like legal arguments rather than binding court rulings, meaning they aren't laws. Different interpretations exist, which could lead to future conflicts or legal challenges.
  3. Political players, including the President and Congress, are engaging in strategic maneuvers over recess appointments. This could damage established norms and affect how politics is conducted in the future.

Recess appointments: watch what you cite...

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 09 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Recess appointments can be confusing because the Constitution is not clear on them. Different people can have different opinions about whether they're legal or not.
  2. Debate about recess appointments is important for democracy. Hearing various viewpoints helps everyone understand the issues better.
  3. Opinions from the Justice Department about recess appointments shouldn't be seen as the final word. They are mainly arguments that support the executive branch and can be challenged by others.

If you like it so much, you defend it

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 24 Feb 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. It's okay for a president to not defend a law they think is unconstitutional. It doesn't mean they're ignoring it, just that they don't want to fight for it in court.
  2. Not enforcing a law is very different from not defending it legally. Not enforcing can lead to big problems, but not defending doesn't change how the law is followed.
  3. If the government believes a law is unconstitutional, it might be better for supporters of that law to find different lawyers to defend it, as the government might not do a good job of it.

On Searches and Seizures

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 25 Apr 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, meaning the police need reasonable suspicion or consent to stop you and check your belongings.
  2. While you should know your rights during police encounters, it's sometimes practical to comply rather than escalate the situation, especially if you're unsure of the laws in your area.
  3. Many people don't know their rights, which can lead to unfair treatment by law enforcement. Being aware and asserting your rights can help discourage police misconduct.

How would Watergate have played out absent the 25th amendment?

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 14 Oct 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Without the 25th amendment, Nixon might have faced different political pressures and may have delayed his resignation. He could have argued that the situation was a partisan attack to gain public support.
  2. Impeachment would likely still happen without the amendment, but the conviction could be less certain. If the GOP had united against it, they might have swayed the Senate's decision.
  3. Carl Albert probably wouldn't have wanted to become Acting President. The pressure to take the role would increase if it meant avoiding an even less desirable president in James Eastland.

Executive sidestepping

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 24 Oct 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. The president has to follow legal authority and can't act like a king. His power comes from the Constitution or laws made by Congress, so saying he's sidestepping Congress isn't really correct.
  2. Executive power in domestic policy mostly comes from Congress giving it to the president. This means he can't make decisions that go against what Congress has already decided without specific permission.
  3. Congress can take back powers it has given to the president whenever it wants. If lawmakers don’t like what the president is doing, they can change the laws to restrict his authority.

Amending the Second: Bret Stephens on Gun Control after Parkland

The Octavian Report • 0 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Real change requires a constitutional solution: amending or repealing the Second Amendment to make gun rights clearly conditional and reduce the huge number of firearms in private hands.
  2. Small, incremental laws won't solve the root problem; we need strict, responsibility-based rules for who can own guns (testing, licensing, legitimate purposes) and practical measures to keep weapons out of dangerous hands.
  3. Success depends on building a sustained, well-organized movement with a big, ambitious goal and organizational strength like the NRA, pairing outspoken young activists with experienced political operators.

By the Numbers: Constitutional Amending in the House

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 18 Nov 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Constitutional Law
  1. Since 1978, no new amendments to the Constitution have been successfully passed by Congress for states to ratify. Only one amendment, the 27th, was ratified many years later.
  2. For an amendment to pass in Congress, a two-thirds majority vote is needed. This means at least 289 votes in the House, depending on the number of members present.
  3. A total of 59 proposed amendments have been introduced in the House in the current Congress, highlighting ongoing discussions about potential changes to the Constitution.