Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Original Meaning Of The Constitution's “Executive Vesting Clause”—Evidence From Eighteenth Century Drafting Practice, Robert G. Natelson
The Original Meaning Of The Constitution's “Executive Vesting Clause”—Evidence From Eighteenth Century Drafting Practice, Robert G. Natelson
Robert G. Natelson
Advocates of presidential power from the days of George Washington at least to the time of George W. Bush have claimed that the Constitution’s so-called “Executive Vesting Clause,” the first sentence of Article II, not only designates the President as chief executive, but also confers broad authority. Some commentators support that view, while others maintain that the President’s powers are limited to those enumerated elsewhere in the Constitution. This study addresses the previously-overlooked question of which interpretation is more consistent with contemporaneous drafting customs. It concludes that treating the “Executive Vesting Clause” as a mere designation is consistent with those …
The Original Meaning Of The Privileges And Immunities Clause, Robert G. Natelson
The Original Meaning Of The Privileges And Immunities Clause, Robert G. Natelson
Robert G. Natelson
This article explains the meaning of the U.S. Constitution's Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, as the Founders understood it. It explains that the terms "privileges" and "immunities" had well-understood content in 18th century law---as benefits created by government. The Clause protects states from discriminating against visitors as to the benefits of citizenship (such as access to the courts), but does not address "natural rights" such as freedom of speech and religion.
Reclaiming Minnesota's Territorial Birthright: Why The Northwest Ordinance Restricts The State's Power Of Eminent Domain To Public Exigencies, Nicholas C. Dranias
Reclaiming Minnesota's Territorial Birthright: Why The Northwest Ordinance Restricts The State's Power Of Eminent Domain To Public Exigencies, Nicholas C. Dranias
Nicholas C Dranias
This short paper explains why the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and the Minnesota state constitution should be read together “as one piece,” and how this reading warrants limiting the use of Minnesota’s power of eminent domain to circumstances of “public exigency.”
Culture, Religion, And Indigenous People, David S. Bogen, Leslie F. Goldstein
Culture, Religion, And Indigenous People, David S. Bogen, Leslie F. Goldstein
David S. Bogen
The Constitution treats culture, religion, and government as separate concepts. Different clauses of the First Amendment protect culture and religion from government. For several decades, the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted the First Amendment as offering religion greater protection against interference than was offered to culture, but the Supreme Court largely dissolved these constitutional differences when confronted with issues posed by the religious practices of Native Americans. With some indigenous Americans, the lines between culture, religion, and even government blur – challenging the Supreme Court’s assumptions about the Constitution. The uniqueness of the claims of Native Americans pushed …