By Mark Rawls

The Constitution is a source of political faith to many people [1]; it is almost revered in some quarters. So why would anyone suggest changing it, not just slightly, but substantially altering its provisions? In fact, a number of academics and political activists have lately suggested just that, arguing that a constitutional convention ought to be called, as provided by Article V of the Constitution. Just last September Harvard Law School hosted the “Conference on the Constitutional Convention”, which brought together advocates of a convention from both the left and right of the political spectrum. Both Lawrence Lessig’s left-leaning Fix Congress First and Mark Meckler’s right-leaning Tea Party Patriots co-sponsored the event . The idea of a constitutional convention has also garnered support from other quarters. The Tennessee Law Review devoted its Spring 2011 issue to constitutional convention scholarship. Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia proposed a number of amendments and advocated for a convention in his 2007 book A More Perfect Constitution. In 2006 Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas published Our Undemocratic Constitution arguing for the calling of a constitutional convention. The proponents of calling a convention come from all manner of political ideology, as do the opponents of a convention. But just what is an Article V constitutional convention? Why should it be called? What would it do? I will explore a number of these issues associated with such a convention in an upcoming series of blog posts. To start out, I will define an Article V convention and discuss several concerns surrounding it. Read more…

By Mark Rawls

Recently several scholars have been discussing Resolution VI and what implications it might have towards theories of constitutional interpretation. They refer to Resolution VI under the Virginia plan, the plan drafted largely by James Madison and presented by Edmund Randolph (both of Virginia) at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787. The resolution, as amended and ratified by the convention, states that Congress shall have the power,

“[T]o legislate in all Cases for the general interests of the Union, and also in those Cases in which the States are separately incompetent, or in which the harmony of the United States may be interrupted by the Exercise of Individual Legislation.” (See here.)

Although the convention adopted this language, which seems to give the federal government considerable power, the language does not appear in the Constitution that they eventually drafted. So what relevance, if any, does it have for modern constitutional interpretation? To answer this question, it is necessary to first explain a few of the innumerable methods of constitutional interpretation found in legal scholarship. Read more…

By Andrew Lindsey

The right of trial by jury is a cherished and essential feature of American law. Though the institution of the jury originated in England, the framers of the Constitution were very keen on incorporating it into our own legal system. Ironically, even before the establishment of our constitutional republic, the denial “of the benefit of Trial by Jury” to the American colonies was an explicit complaint lodged against England in the Declaration of Independence. After the revolutionary war, one of the main concerns the states expressed towards ratifying the proposed articles of the Constitution was the lack of an express right to a jury trial in civil cases. As a result, the 7^th Amendment was proposed and ultimately adopted as part of the Bill of Rights. Read more…

By Andrew Lindsey

It is a rare American who does not have an opinion about the meaning of our Constitution. From the most informal settings of household discussion to the highest venues of public debate, constitutional controversies are continuously contemplated and confronted in our society. This is something that sets us apart from many countries, and is something that our founding fathers would be proud of. They believed that a politically engaged electorate was necessary to keep America alive and free, and they encouraged perpetual scrutiny of our founding document. Most people care about our Constitution because they are aware that, ultimately, they can change it. But out of the entire framework of fundamental powers, protections, and procedures designed by the founders, were there any provisions that they deemed too important to change? Read more…

Early today our Program Director, Julie Silverbrook, was a featured guest on The Hampton Roads Show, a daily TV program.

On the program, Julie discussed the Constitutional Conversations program and our 2011 Constitution Day Program: “Why Civic Education is Essential to a Healthy Democracy” on September 15 at 6:30pm at the Williamsburg Library.

The video from Tuesday’s program can be seen below:

Earlier this week, our Program Director, Julie Silverbrook, was a featured guest on HearSay, a daily radio program hosted by Cathy Lewis on 89.5 WHRV-FM in Norfolk, Virginia.

On the program, Julie discussed the Constitutional Conversations program and our 2011 Constitution Day Program: “Why Civic Education is Essential to a Healthy Democracy” on September 15 at 6:30pm at the Williamsburg Library.

The podcast from Tuesday’s program can be found here (podcasts are posted 24-48 hours after the program airs).

On Tuesday, September 13th, Julie Silverbrook (JD ’12), director of the award-winning Constitutional Conversations program, will be discussing the program on the Hampton Roads Show on Fox43 TV.  She will also be a featured guest on Cathy Lewis’s award-winning radio program, “HearSay.” Be sure to tune in!

Join us for our 2011 Constitution Day Program, “Why Civic Education is Essential to a Healthy Democracy.”

Featuring:

William E. (Bill) White, Ph.D., Royce R. & Kathryn M. Baker Vice President

Productions, Publications, and Learning Ventures, The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation

Meg Heubeck, Director of Instruction, Youth Leadership Initiative, University of Virginia Center for Politics

Kelly Carmichael Booz, Director of Civic Education, Center for the Constitution at James Madisonʼs Montpelier

Julie Silverbrook, Director, Constitutional Conversations Program, William & Mary Law School

Moderator: Dr. Beverly Thurston, Coordinator

Location:

Williamsburg Library Theater

515 Scotland Street

Thursday, September 15th at 6:30 p.m.

Download the program here: 2011 Constitution Day Program

See our events page for more information, or download the 2011-2012_Adult_Program Schedule or the High School Program Schedule in PDF form. We look forward to seeing you there!