Free Republic

Old America knew instinctively what our founders had declared: liberty is precious, but it cannot endure untethered. Freedom must be fastened to virtue, or else it curdles into license. John Adams once warned that the Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, and that it was wholly inadequate for any other. He knew what we seem to have forgotten. --- snip This fracture is not merely political. It is spiritual. And at the heart of it, I suspect, lies our rejection of the faith that once anchored us. Christianity, whatever one thinks of its theology, gave this...

(Sep. 17, 2025) — During the process of developing the U.S. Constitution Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft for a Constitution on June 18, 1787. At some point, he also suggested to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military. Another version of Hamilton’s proposed Constitution and which principles were stated during the convention’s deliberations per Madison notes and journal (see work of Farrand – pg 619), was given to Madison near the close of the convention for inclusion...

The triumph of the Convention of 1787 is that in raising a standard to which the wise and honest could repair, it also raised one that met the threefold test of legitimacy, popularity, and viability.One reason the Convention was able to strike the right balance between the urge to lead the people and the need to obey them, and between the urge to be noble and the need to be practical, was the disposition of most delegates to be “whole men” on stern principles and “halfway men” on negotiable details. Another was the way in which it worked with familiar...

Did Charlie Kirk say it is acceptable for people to die so we can have guns? Of course not. He actually gave a highly reasonable speech on the necessity of the right to keep and bear arms. We have seen an insane number of people commenting that it is perfectly fine and even wonderful that Charlie Kirk was assassinated because he justified gun violence. First of all, it is not right to laugh and dance about the murder of a young father in any case, but especially not in this case, when leftists are as usual grossly misrepresenting what he...

John Adams, in his retirement, was disheartened. What had his life in politics counted for? he wondered. The renewal in 1805 of a 30-year friendship with Doctor Benjamin Rush reinvigorated him. ... In one conversation about the “perfectibility of man” and religion’s role in making “men and nations happy,” both Rush and Adams lamented the moral decay they witnessed in the world around them. “By renouncing the Bible,” Rush interjected, “philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral Subjects. . . . It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published. It contains a...

(Sep. 12, 2025) — Introduction As the “birthright citizenship” issue strolls its way through the lower federal courts, its related “kissing cousin” issue – the “natural born Citizen” (“nbC”) presidential eligibility restriction – remains on a back burner, simmering in a pot of widespread electorate, academic and media indifference. Happily, one of the few Internet sites where these issues are not treated so casually is the one you are now visiting: The Post & Email. To that point, two recent federal appellate court decisions may play a significant role in again bringing the nbC issue to a front, instead of...

A Florida state appeals court ruled that the state's ban on openly carrying firearms is unconstitutional. The ruling from the 1st District Court of Appeal, citing U.S. Supreme Court decisions on Second Amendment rights, found the open-carry ban incompatible with the Second Amendment

Democratic Senator Tim Kaine from Virginia, in a hearing on Wednesday, told the room: The notion that rights don't come from laws, and don't come from the government, but come from the Creator... That's what the Iranian government believes... So the statement that our rights do not come from our laws or our governments is extremely troubling.

An Alaska man is petitioning the Supreme Court to consider whether the government's seizure of his $95,000 plane for transporting an illicit six-pack of beer is an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment. The Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, filed a petition for writ of certiorari today on behalf of Ken Jouppi, an 82-year-old Alaskan bush pilot, asking the Supreme Court to rule on whether states should consider the gravity of a defendant's specific offense, rather than an abstract view of the general crime. Jouppi was convicted of a misdemeanor in 2012 when state troopers searched his...

The Supreme Court has already expanded President Donald Trump’s authority in a string of emergency rulings, but he’s signaling in his firing of Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook and other issues likely headed to the court that he continues to seek broader powers for the executive branch. The cases could serve as major tests of how much further the nation’s high court is willing to go to bless the president’s assertion of executive authority. They differ from previous showdowns because of the sheer magnitude of the authority Trump is seeking to wield and because he wants greater control over powers...

I noticed some time ago that LV didn't have any works by Noah Webster, creator of that dictionary. Well, now they have one. https://librivox.org/examination-of-the-federal-constitution-by-noah-webster/

U.S. stock futures were lower Tuesday, adding to a slide in the major averages to start the week, after President Donald Trump removed Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from the board of the central bank....Trump’s unprecedented move adds to the pressure the president has been putting on the central bank’s independence. By law, a president may only remove Fed governor “for cause.” As a result, it is possible the matter will be challenged in the courts.

President Donald Trump is responding to the decision by a New York appellate court Thursday to throw out the bogus $515 million fraud case brought against him by Attorney General Letitia James. Here is Trump's full reaction, which he posted on Truth Social: TOTAL VICTORY in the FAKE New York State Attorney General Letitia James Case! I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State. Others were afraid to do business there. The amount, including Interest and Penalties, was over $550...

An appellate court has thrown out the $500 million civil fraud penalty against former President Donald Trump in the high-profile case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.......The panel upheld findings that Trump and his company were liable, affirming that James acted within her authority and that injunctive relief to curb Trump Organization practices was appropriate.The ruling leaves liability intact but eliminates the massive financial penalty.

A New York state appeals court voided a more than $500 million civil fraud penalty imposed on President Donald Trump. The appeals court said “injunctive relief” ordered by the trial judge in the case was “well crafted to curb defendants’ business culture” at the Trump Organization. But the order that “directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” the appeals court said.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that a man born in New York City in 1950 is NOT an American citizen. The court affirmed what the Constitution’s framers and generations of Americans have always understood: the Fourteenth Amendment does not grant automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats.

The question of whether a public official in the United States can undermine the U.S. Constitution without violating their oath of office is complex, as it hinges on the nature of the oath, the definition of “undermine,” and the legal and practical mechanisms for assessing violations. Drawing on your prior questions about the oath of office (specifically in Indiana), socialism, communism, abortion, and ballot access, this response analyzes the issue through constitutional principles, legal standards, judicial precedents, and practical considerations. The answer will clarify whether actions that undermine the Constitution inherently breach the oath and under what circumstances they might...

Our Constitution, perhaps the greatest document in human history behind the Bible, is not quite perfect. In 2025, we can see things that might have been added. Number one is probably term limits. Another would be a prohibition on deficit spending outside of war. And maybe they could have added something about judges being responsible for the crimes the criminals they release into society commit… No doubt there are countless things we could sit here 250 years later and think of that the Founding Fathers could have added, but didn’t because they couldn’t see into the future. One thing they...

A public official’s ability to advocate for a form of government other than a Constitutional Republic without violating their Oath of Office depends on the specific oath they took, the legal framework governing their role, and the context of their advocacy. Below, I’ll break this down systematically, focusing on the United States as the context, since the term "Constitutional Republic" strongly suggests a U.S.-centric question. 1. Understanding the Oath of Office In the U.S., public officials—such as elected officials, judges, and federal employees—typically swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. For example: The Presidential...

After the great rebuke of 2024, many Democrats seem to think their party needs to become more moderate. But there’s another theory potent on the American left that believes Donald Trump’s election shows not just that American democracy is in danger, but that it doesn’t really work at all. What the country needs isn’t just a new policy agenda; it might need the kind of constitutional revolution — from adding new states, to packing the Supreme Court — that some Democrats already flirted with under Joe Biden. That’s the kind of argument that my guest today, Osita Nwanevu, makes in...