The measure of our fundamental law is not whether it actualizes the general will—that was the point of the French Revolution, not the American. The measure of our Constitution is whether it is effective at encouraging just, stable, and free government—government that protects the rights of its citizens.
I fear America may be leaving the world of normal politics and entering the dangerous world of regime politics—a politics in which our political loyalties diverge more and more, as they did in the 1850s, between two contrary visions of the country.
To date, the only crime related to the Trump-Russia investigation is the criminal leaking of classified information about U.S. citizens by intelligence officials.
In the weeks following the Citizens United ruling, the Left settled on a new strategy. If it could no longer use speech laws against its opponents, it would do the next best thing—it would threaten, harass, and intimidate its opponents out of participation.
Increasingly large majorities of the people consistently profess themselves afraid of their government. They think it too big.
I very much disagree with the idea that this election marks a decisive event in our politics, or a point of no return.
Joseph Stalin once said, “The people who cast the votes don’t decide an election, the people who count the votes do.”
The most significant meaning of the 2004 election is that America has renounced the worst lessons of the post-Vietnam era.
James Madison wrote that the natural right to property was the most comprehensive of all the natural rights that provided reservations against government.
The solution to political corruption, then, is to return to the Constitution—not to depart from it even farther than we already have.