In 1965, the U.S. Congress made a seismic decision. Faced with the disenfranchisement of black voters on the one hand, and a Constitutional mandate to maintain equal sovereignty among the states on the other, Congress decided that jurisdictions with histories of racial discrimination at the polls should be compelled to seek “preclearance” from federal authorities any time they wished to change their voting procedures. Continue Reading »
More and more, one of our two major political parties is identifying itself as secular, and the other as religious. That’s a very bad thing for America. Continue Reading »
A political system, along with such supportive traditions as the rule of law and loyal opposition, is supposed to be a durable fixture on the political landscape and ought not to be changed lightly. It should be amended only when a favorable consensus can be achieved, and if that consensus is not forthcoming, then the constitution remains as it is. Continue Reading »
In the public square, many misuse the word “dignity” by conflating its subjective and objective meanings. Some see it as descriptive of behavior, an idiosyncratic concept that can vary widely across cultures. Thus, when I am on the dance floor, few would say I exhibit dignity. But my herky-jerky . . . . Continue Reading »
In Obergefell v. Hodges, Justice Kennedy has penned a decision of historic hubris and stupidity—as both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia argue in their dissents. The basis of the decision is a claim to special enlightenment (we shall not say “revelation”) about the meaning and . . . . Continue Reading »
Happy Canada Day, America! One decade later, your judges have turned you, too, into a nation of bastards. I don’t mean that in quite the usual sense, of course—you’ve been doing a fine job yourselves, without any help from us, of turning out fatherless children. I mean rather that . . . . Continue Reading »
The final paragraph of Justice Kennedy's decision is being hailed as an eloquent and humane expression that identifies what was really at stake in the marriage case: not the Constitutionality of traditional marriage laws, but the dignity and happiness of a particular group. Here is the full . . . . Continue Reading »
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s marriage decision, these sober thoughts occur: (1) The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has rendered a decision that puts the Court at odds with the Constitution, with reason, and with biblical religion. (2) SCOTUS has gotten it wrong before. It . . . . Continue Reading »
A First Things symposium on how to respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Continue Reading »
As the Supreme Court prepares to announce its decision on same-sex marriage, religious people are wondering: will we lose our tax-exempt status for our religious institutions? Justice Samuel Alito raised this question during the oral arguments, citing the 1983 Supreme Court case that ruled Bob Jones . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
