Library of Congress

This is the ninth episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. In colonial America, peacetime standing armies were often viewed as tools that monarchs could use to wield power over the populace rather than protect the people’s security. This episode examines the source of that view; Grievances 11 and 14, which alleged that the King kept armies in places in Boston and quartered troops among the civilian population; and the influence of these experiences on the Constitution.

This is the eighth episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. This episode further explores the Declaration’s tenth grievance by examining how the King’s officials allegedly deprived the colonists of their rights as Englishmen in their efforts to enforce the Navigation Acts. These experiences, which included the crown’s prosecution of John Hancock, resulted in the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against warrantless searches, the Fifth Amendment’s right to indictment by a grand jury, and other protections for criminal defendants under the Constitution.

This is the seventh episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. This episode addresses the Declaration’s tenth grievance that British customs officers and other royal officials often acted arbitrarily or used their powers to harass and abuse colonists. Among other things, the episode examines colonist James Otis’s argument that British law allowing warrantless searches in the colonies should be void because such searches violate natural rights and rights protected by the British constitution. While Otis lost his case, his argument is reflected in the Constitution’s recognition of two tiers of law—the Constitution and laws Congress adopts pursuant to the Constitution. As a consequence, laws that would override the Constitution, including the fundamental rights enshrined in it, can only be adopted by amending the Constitution.

This is the sixth episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. Grievance 9 in the Declaration blames the King for making colonial judges “dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.” This episode discusses the relationship between the King and colonial judges and how the founding Americans sought to protect judicial independence in the new United States.

This is the fifth episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. This episode addresses the Declaration’s eighth grievance that King George III refused his assent to laws that provided for colonial courts. The episode discusses how colonial courts evolved, including how disagreement between King George III and North Carolina over foreign attachment led to North Carolina being without courts for several years. The episode further discusses how these experiences later influenced the Constitution.

This is the fourth episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. This episode addresses the Declaration’s seventh grievance that King George III prohibited the colonies from growing in population and territory. The episode examines how the colonies departed from English restrictions on naturalization, immigration, and territorial growth, and it discusses how these experiences later influenced the Constitution.

This is the first episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III and how these grievances shaped the Constitution. Grievances 1 and 2 address the King’s power to negative (or veto) colonial laws or suspend such laws pending a decision on whether to approve them.In addition to providing background on the grievances, the episode examines how the grievances informed the Framers of the Constitution during the Convention. In particular, the episode explores the Framers’ consideration of whether to allow Congress a similar power to negative state laws; the development of the Supremacy Clause as an alternative to a congressional negative; and the President’s power to veto laws passed by Congress.

This is the second episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. Grievances 3 and 4 address the King’s interference with colonial legislatures’ ability to create legislative districts to accommodate new settlers and the King’s convening of colonial assemblies in unusual places as a means of coercing them to comply with his ordersIn addition to providing background on the grievances, the episode examines how they may have influenced the Framers when they drafted the Constitution at the Federal Convention in 1787. In particular, the episode considers how the Framers sought to prevent the federal government from interfering with state legislatures’ work and discusses how the Framers attempted to prevent the President from interfering with Congress’s work.

This is the third episode in a podcast series celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence by exploring the colonies’ grievances against King George III. Grievances 5 and 6 address the King’s dissolution of colonial assemblies and his refusal to cause new assemblies to be elected.In addition to providing background on the grievances, the episode examines how they may have influenced the Framers when they drafted the Constitution at the Federal Convention in 1787. In particular, the episode considers how the Framers sought to prevent the federal government from interfering with state legislatures’ work and sought to prevent the President from interfering with Congress’s work.

From January 1920 to December 1933, the Eighteenth Amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale, or transportation of alcoholic beverages within the United States. Studying nationwide Prohibition can inform an understanding of how the Supreme Court has interpreted the scope of Congress’s power to regulate commerce over time; how difficult it can be for the federal government to regulate individual social habits and moral choices; and how the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence evolved in response to enforcement techniques that federal or state authorities employed to investigate violations of Prohibition, such as warrantless wiretapping of telephone lines.Part I of this two-part series discusses historical events leading up to the Eighteenth Amendment’s proposal in Congress, including the temperance movement and early state prohibition laws.

From January 1920 to December 1933, the Eighteenth Amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale, or transportation of alcoholic beverages within the United States. Studying nationwide Prohibition can inform an understanding of how the Supreme Court has interpreted the scope of Congress’s power to regulate commerce over time; how difficult it can be for the federal government to regulate individual social habits and moral choices; and how the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence evolved in response to enforcement techniques that federal or state authorities employed to investigate violations of Prohibition, such as warrantless wiretapping of telephone lines.Part II of this two-part series examines congressional debates over the Eighteenth Amendment, relevant Supreme Court decisions, and the Twenty-First Amendment’s repeal of Prohibition.

On December 1, 2023, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor passed away at the age of 93. O’Connor served as the first female Supreme Court Justice from 1981 to 2006. She was known for her role in landmark Supreme Court decisions on abortion rights, affirmative action, federalism, the First Amendment, and many other issues.This podcast episode examines Justice O’Connor’s life and some of the highlights from her tenure as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

For more than a century after the Constitution’s ratification, many states prohibited female citizens of the United States from voting in federal or state elections. Ratified in 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment prohibits the federal and state governments from denying or abridging a U.S. citizen’s right to vote on the basis of sex, thereby recognizing women’s suffrage—in other words, a woman’s right to vote. This podcast episode will explore the evolution of the women’s suffrage movement in the United States and the events leading up to the Nineteenth Amendment’s ratification. It also discusses the ways in which the Amendment continues to have a lasting impact throughout society.

In Article V of the Constitution, the Framers provided for the Constitution to be amended, but the Constitution’s meaning changes in other ways. This podcast examines the mechanics of formally amending the Constitution under Article V and how the Constitution’s meaning has evolved in response to historical events, social movements, and Supreme Court decisions by looking at several key moments in the development of constitutional law throughout the nation’s history. The podcast discusses concepts such as penumbral reasoning, extra-textual values and principles, and the small “c” constitution.

What were the Framers’ objectives when they structured the Constitution? This podcast centers the Constitution in its historical context, examining challenges the Framers’ faced in establishing the federal government, the reasons for the framework they adopted, and alternatives the Framers considered and discarded. In particular, this podcast considers the choices the Framers made when allocating federal power among the three branches of government.

Although the Constitution serves as the Supreme Law of the Land, how should its provisions be interpreted over two hundred years after it was drafted? The Supreme Court of the United States sometimes relies on certain methods of interpretation—that is, ways of interpreting a particular constitutional provision. This two-part podcast describes the most common methods of constitutional interpretation; discusses examples of Supreme Court decisions that demonstrate the application of these methods; and provides a general overview of the various arguments in support of, and in opposition to, the use of such methods of constitutional interpretation. Part I discusses two of the most commonly used methods of constitutional analysis: textualism and originalism.

Although the Constitution serves as the Supreme Law of the Land, how should its provisions be interpreted over two hundred years after it was drafted? The Supreme Court of the United States sometimes relies on certain methods of interpretation—that is, ways of interpreting a particular constitutional provision. This two-part podcast describes the most common methods of constitutional interpretation; discusses examples of Supreme Court decisions that demonstrate the application of these methods; and provides a general overview of the various arguments in support of, and in opposition to, the use of such methods of constitutional interpretation. Part II discusses six methods of constitutional analysis, including the use of historical practices, practical considerations, and the Constitution’s structure to elaborate on its meaning.