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.
Browse All Publications & Resources
Brief by members of Congress including former Congressmen Mickey Edwards and Thomas Evans (members of TCP's Liberty and Security Committee), arguing against claim of executive privilege. Brief urges enforcement of House Judiciary Committee subpoena for officials' testimony before Congress regarding the forced resignation of nine United States Attorneys.
Brief by members of Congress including former Congressmen Mickey Edwards and Thomas Evans (members of TCP's Liberty and Security Committee), arguing against claim of executive privilege. Brief urges enforcement of House Judiciary Committee subpoena for officials' testimony before Congress regarding the forced resignation of nine United States Attorneys.
Statement of TCP Coalition to Defend Checks and Balances describes constitutional problems with presidential signing statements that assert the president will not abide by the law.
Prepared witness testimony outlines constitutional problems with Presidential signing statements that assert the president will not abide by the law.
Statement of TCP Coalition to Defend Checks and Balances urges restoring robust system of checks and balances with proper roles for all three branches of government, noting that this should not be a partisan issue.
The Constitution Project’s Courts Initiative launched a comprehensive bipartisan project in 1999 to examine the efficacy of the federal judicial nomination and confirmation process. This report provides an update of the data and analysis collected then, with statistics from President George W. Bush’s first term and the 108th Congress. The statistics remain discouraging and much reform is still needed to reverse the trend of increasing delay in appointing judges to our federal courts.
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.
Liberty and Security Committee report examines constitutional issues of executive power with establishing domestic military command, and military conducting intelligence operations.
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.
