The legal professoriate and commentariat are completely unhinged over the impending demise of the individual mandate. ... Let's go to the transcript and try to explain this one more time, in terms that even the Harvard crowd may be able to comprehend.

There remains a long line of unfortunate and flawed Supreme Court precedents regarding the broad scope of the powers granted to Congress under both the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.

Rather than await the decision on the Affordable Care Act, President Obama decided to attack preemptively with error-filled claims about the place of judicial review in our constitutional system. Judicial review springs from the duty of a court, when deciding a case before it, to enforce the Constitution over a conflicting act of Congress.

In important cases that will be argued before the end of the year, the U.S. Supreme Court will address central questions of federalism and interstate commerce. Ashcroft v. Raich presents the question of whether the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress to criminalize the mere possession of marijuana, even where state laws...

Legal scholars examined the decisions handed down by the Supreme Court in the session ending in June 2005 and the future composition of the Court.

ObamaCare's individual mandate, which requires Americans to purchase health insurance, exceeds the limits of the Constitution's Commerce Clause.

Developing cannabis into aneffective prescription medication can be a goal within reach. But it will take a federal government that is truly open to the research that it claims to value.

William H. Rehnquist went from "Lone Ranger" to chief justice, and saw many of his conservative views triumph at the Supreme Court. But recent rulings went against him.