Tag Archives: Constitution

Michael Medved: Attacking the Founders’ Flag

Former quarterback Colin Kaepernick, best known for his protests during the national anthem, has launched new attacks against the “The Betsy Ross Flag,” used by patriots during the Revolution.

Under pressure from Kaepernick, Nike canceled plans for special edition sneakers decorated with the flag, featuring a circle of thirteen stars representing the thirteen rebellious colonies. All of them allowed slavery, so Kaepernick connects them to “white supremacy.”

This ignores impassioned, anti-slavery patriots – like Adams, Franklin and Hamilton – as well as Betsy Ross herself. Historians debate whether she designed the flag personally, but we do know she came from a devout Quaker family – and Quakers led anti-slavery activism in America. What’s more, Betsy’s home colony of Pennsylvania was the first to abolish slavery – in 1780, 7 years before the Constitution.

Slurs against our Founders and their banner are not only foolish, but ignorant.

Read More »

David Davenport: The Deceptive Popular Vote Bill Gains Momentum

Democrats, angry about losing the presidency twice in the Electoral College since 2000, are quietly taking action. The National Popular Vote Bill passed in three more states—Colorado, Delaware and New Mexico—this Spring and recently passed state senates in two more.

I call it the Constitutional End-Run Voting Bill because it would eliminate the Electoral College without passing a proper constitutional amendment. States agree to cast their electoral votes not for the winner in their state but for the winner of the national popular vote. Think of it: Your state votes for Candidate A, but your vote goes to Candidate B. Talk about your vote not counting.

The Constitution says votes are counted in state capitals and then electors make the final choice. Beware of trick plays that undermine both the Constitution and the states.

Read More »

Albert Mohler: Justice Thomas Weighs in Abortion

The big news coming out of the Supreme Court on abortion had as much or more to do with a decision that they let stand as much as the decision that they overturned.

The Court decided not to take up the question on appeal of an Indiana law that made abortion illegal if it were sought merely for reasons of sex selection or disability.

We should pay very close attention to the brilliant concurring opinion of Justice Thomas.

He made very clear that this issue will be back.

In his words, “The Court’s decision to allow further percolation should not be interpreted as agreement with the decisions. Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th-century eugenics movement.”

In other words, Justice Thomas said, “The issue will come back to the court. It must come back to the court.”

Read More »

Albert Mohler: The Kansas High Court and the Meaning of Words

The culture of death has gained new ground as the state Supreme Court in Kansas has now blocked a law that would have protected unborn human life.

In a decisive 6-1 decision, the majority said that, according to the Kansas state constitution, a woman there has a right to an abortion, to the procedure known as D&E—dilation and evacuation. Note: that is the dismemberment and the removal of the unborn child from the woman’s body.

The decision was breathtaking, catching both sides of the abortion argument in Kansas by surprise.

The constitution of Kansas was adopted in 1859. Abortion was not mentioned. Abortion wasn’t intended.

Once again: We’re looking at invented law and invented rights made by courts.

If we are not restrained by the meaning of words—in this case the words of the state constitution—then we are fundamentally unrestrained. And that means our government is unrestrained, and there are few more deadly dangers than a government unrestrained.

Read More »

Lanhee Chen: After Mueller: A Look at the 2020 Election

President Trump faces a much clearer pathway to reelection in 2020 now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s found no evidence that the President or the Trump campaign colluded with Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

President Trump’s task ahead is to focus his reelection effort on the reasons why voters should give him a second term in office.  And while Democrats continue to obsess over Trump and his alleged misdeeds, it’s up to the President and his team to focus instead on the ways in which they’ve improved the livelihoods of the American people with tangible policy accomplishments.

The President spearheaded tax cuts that have helped many Americans keep more of their hard-earned money; his Administration has cut regulatory burdens and red tape to spur economic growth; and he has appointed judges to federal courts who respect the rule of law and the Constitution.

If President Trump can keep his rhetoric—and his focus—on touting these accomplishments, he’ll go a long way toward winning four more years in the Oval Office.

Read More »

Michael Medved: A Message to Representative Omar

Imagine if conservatives had attacked freshman Congress member Ilhan Omar by questioning her loyalty to the United States and suggesting that she cared more about her Muslim faith or her Somali homeland than she did about America.

Democrats along with all right-thinking people would have been outraged at the bigoted nature of such an assault, but Omar herself has repeatedly slammed her pro-Israel colleagues on a similarly unacceptable basis. Her most recent comments claim that Israel supporters “push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

This is no more appropriate than prior slanders against Catholic Americans for “allegiance” to the Vatican over loyalty to America, or potential claims against Omar and Muslim colleagues for giving devotion to Islam above the Constitution.

It’s always okay to challenge the judgment of Jewish or Christian supporters of Israel, but it’s never appropriate to question their patriotism.

Read More »

Michael Medved: Impeachment Dreams, National Nightmares


Democratic impeachment dreams will inevitably collide with a Constitution that makes removal of a president all but impossible. With the current Senate line-up, Democrats would need to persuade 20 Republicans to join all 47 of them for the two-thirds vote to drive Trump from office.

In 232 years of Constitutional history, no US Senator—not even one—has ever voted to remove a president of his or her own party. What happened to Richard Nixon in 1974? The Watergate crisis climaxed in the midst of a midterm election campaign; a campaign in which the GOP ultimately lost 48 House seats and 5 in the Senate.

In a desperate bid to mitigate looming disaster, Senate leaders begged Nixon to resign. For the sake of his party and his country, he did so. In Trump’s case, elections are nearly two years away and, barring unforeseen, catastrophic revelations, his resignation is inconceivable.

Read More »