Strip Search for a Minor Offense: Is It Constitutional?
To the Supreme Court, questions of dignity and rights seem less important than defining "true anal cavity searches" More »
Advertisement
Garrett Epps, a former reporter for The Washington Post, is a novelist and legal scholar. He teaches courses in constitutional law and creative writing for law students at the University of Baltimore and lives in Washington, D.C. His new book is Wrong and Dangerous: Ten Right Wing Myths About Our Constitution.
To the Supreme Court, questions of dignity and rights seem less important than defining "true anal cavity searches" More »
If civil rights laws don't apply to religious teachers, Justice Sotomayor asks, what about child-abuse reporting laws? More »
While we wait for the main course -- the Affordable Care Act case -- the Court offers some intriguing appetizers More »
In his recent book Fed Up!, the new Republican front-runner found treason everywhere, molding history to fit his ideas More »
As ballot restrictions multiply, the state is bringing a lawsuit against the right to vote More »
People fib. But a current court case centers around whether laws can stop them. More »
The system we have for presidential elections is dangerous and rickety. It should be reformed -- very carefully. More »
The Founders wrote "the law of nations" into the document; the far right wants to read it out More »
The 17th Amendment removed a firewall of privilege -- which is why the Right doesn't like it More »
Why do some on the right look at this basic guarantee of democracy and think nothing's there? More »
Today's "Tenthers" seem to be yearning for the good old Articles of Confederation, not this newfangled left-wing Madison thing More »
In a time of crisis, Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment is a fireaxe on the wall, and the president may have to break the glass More »
The "right to bear arms" is not a right to nullify any government measure a "sovereign citizen" finds irksome More »
The Justice's interpretation of the Constitution is one of pick-and-choose history More »
The problem isn't "corporate personhood"; it's simple-minded interpretation that refuses to take note of the real function of the First Amendment More »
The president's reasons for skirting the War Powers Resolution sound an awful lot like his predecessor's justifications for torture More »
America's Founding Fathers may not have included the phrase, but the history is clear—they never wanted a Christian nation More »
The idea that the President's powers aren't limited by Congress is a radical—and dangerous—trend More »
What really drives this idea today isn't legal theory; it's the political fear that the people of the United States will enact progressive legislation More »
Justice Scalia and certain other conservatives deny that America's Founding Fathers left any room for interpretation in the Constitution More »
