Constitutional Context Osher Institute at SDSU

A recent podcast (entitled “Libel to Stay”) explained why Free-Speech doctrines prevented Donald Trump from suing journalist Bob Woodward (or any other serious critic) for defamation.  So, on the flip side, one of this month’s podcasts addresses how the First Amendment recently saved the President as a defendant in a defamation suit brought by Stephanie […]

The National Park Service recently proposed to significantly limit the scope of demonstrations in front of the White House or on the National Mall, the nearby 1000-plus acre swath of green space, memorials, and other historic installations. The proposals were closely scrutinized (and criticized at length) during a round of public comment closing on October […]

One very intriguing case on the Supreme Court’s 2018-2019 docket is unlikely to make big headlines or be featured on the Sunday news shows.  In fact, it’s likely you’ll only hear about it from this podcast! Timbs v. Indiana illustrates a phenomenon that even lawyers can forget: that the Constitution’s first 10 amendments (commonly known […]

I get the ideas for the subjects of these podcasts from a variety of sources.  Some podcasts are suggested by decisions made, or soon to be made, by the Supreme Court or lower courts.  Others bounce off of controversies about legislative or other policy-changing proposals.  Occasionally, a public statement by an official – or a […]

Events surrounding the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court illustrates how, on matters of Supreme Court nomination and confirmation, the U.S. Constitution is largely missing in action. To begin with, the Framers provided no minimal qualifications for who could serve as a Justice. As school kids learn, […]

So…having set the stage in Part One for the potential reversal of Roe v. Wade in the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, here’s the skinny on how Roe narrowly escaped: Justice Sandra O’Connor defied expectations by joining two other presumably anti-Roe justices to form a trio affirming its “central rule” that a pregnant woman […]