Freespace

The most unconstitutional law in America

In a new article at Discourse, I discuss the Indian Child Welfare Act, which I think is the most unconstitutional law in America. What I mean is that it violates so many different constitutional principles, including everything from equal protection to federalism, and even the “minimum contacts” rule of personal jurisdiction.

Tearing down Thomas Jefferson: ad hominem on a national scale

I spoke this morning with Armstrong and Getty about plans to remove a statute of Thomas Jefferson from New York City Hall. Jefferson, of course, is a great hero of mine, but I'm not particularly concerned about removing his statue; I don't think Jefferson would have been concerned. But far more worrisome is the rationale behind it, which consists of an effort to make Americans ashamed of their nation's founding. That is a deadly thing, as I explain:

Talking with Hugh Hewitt about the Indian Child Welfare Act

Got up early this morning to talk with Hugh Hewitt about the Indian Child Welfare Act. If you slept in, you can listen to it here.

Talking with Armstrong and Getty about Virginia school board persecuting two moms

On Friday I talked with my friends Armstrong and Getty about a lawsuit the Goldwater Institute is currently litigating in defense of two mothers who were sued by the Fairfax County, Virginia, School Board when they published information they legally obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The Board, embarrassed by the contents of some of the documents, ordered the moms not to "disseminate" the information--a blatant violation of the First Amendment. You can learn more about the case here and listen here:

Time to end the race-based law that harms Native American children

I have an article In this morning's Orange County Register about the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Brackeen case challenging its constitutionality. Federal, state, and tribal governments, as well as would-be adoptive parents have all asked the Court to take that case. I explain why it needs to--and why it needs to strike the Act down for violating a host of constitutional rules, and harming the very children it supposedly protects. Excerpt:

...if a white or black child is abused by a parent, the state can take her into protective custody as long as it first makes “reasonable efforts” to preserve the family unit. This is not required, however, if “aggravated circumstances” exist, such as molestation or a parent’s drug addiction. But ICWA requires “active efforts,” a term the law doesn’t define, but which is more demanding than “reasonable” efforts—and this is not excused by “aggravated circumstances.” That means state agencies must return Indian children to families they know are hurting them. The results are often tragic. Montana officials knew Anthony Renova was being abused, so they placed him in foster care for four of his five years of life. Had he been non-Indian, he might have been adopted into a safe, loving family. Instead, thanks to ICWA, the state was forced to return him to his abusive parents in February 2019. Nine months later, they beat him to death.

Read the rest...