Publications & Resources
Search TCP documents by typing a keyword (e.g., author, document title, etc.) into the search box and hitting the search button. Refine your results by selecting from the issues, material types, date range, and committee options listed. You can also browse recent publications and resources below.
Search Results
In this report, The Constitution Project’s War Powers Committee analyzes and prescribes how the U.S. government should constitutionally and prudently make the decision to use armed force abroad. The Committee’s operating premise was that if we can clarify and improve how the United States decides to use force, then it will more wisely decide whether to use force.
The Constitution Project created the Independent Courts Toolbox™ for activist organizations and individuals working locally to defend the independence of the judiciary. This multifaceted “toolbox” is designed to empower those who would like to work on behalf of independent courts but lack the information and materials, and the time and resources, to develop them.
Professor Michael J. Gerhardt testified at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee’s Constitution Subcommittee called to examine the Congress’ power to limit federal jurisdiction, or to employ what are commonly called jurisdiction-stripping measures, in response to recent court decisions on marriage. Professor Gerhardt urges the Committee to recognize that the benefits of our constitutional systems of separation of powers and federalism far outweigh whatever their costs, and to reject proposals to regulate federal court jurisdiction in retaliation against, or in efforts to influence, substantive judicial outcomes.
Panel discussion on proposed constitutional amendment co-hosted by TCP.
The case concerns a state judge, Thomas A. Spargo, who was alleged to have committed several ethical violations involving political partisanship. A district court judge held that the ethical rules Spargo was alleged to have violated were unconstitutional. The amicus brief urges the appellate court to reverse the lower court' s decision and hold that the ethical rules barring political partisanship were constitutional, since it is reasonably for society to expect judges to remain above the political fray.
The case concerns a state judge, Thomas A. Spargo, who was alleged to have committed several ethical violations involving political partisanship. A district court judge held that the ethical rules Spargo was alleged to have violated were unconstitutional. The amicus brief urges the appellate court to reverse the lower court' s decision and hold that the ethical rules barring political partisanship were constitutional, since it is reasonably for society to expect judges to remain above the political fray.
Liberty and Security Committee report examines constitutional issues of executive power with establishing domestic military command, and military conducting intelligence operations.
Constitutional Amendments Committee report proposes guidelines for the limited circumstances under which the Constitution should be amended, but does not take positions on the merits of any particular proposed amendment.
As part of the polarization and posturing that increasingly characterize our national and state politics, threats to the independence of the judiciary have become more commonplace. In an effort to change the nature of the public debate on judicial independence to a more sober and informed one, The Constitution Project formed task forces from among the members of its committees to develop consensus recommendations in four key areas: federal judicial selection; selecting state court judges; the distinction between intimidation and legitimate criticism of judges; and the role of the legislature in setting the power and jurisdiction of the courts.
The Constitution Project has developed standards for judicial campaigns that will encourage candidates to seek the “higher ground” in their campaigns. The standards are designed to imbue judicial campaigns with the principles that give Americans confidence in their justice system: honesty, dignity, and impartiality.
