VIDEO – Constitutional Crisis? Article II v. Article III
Is there a “consitutional crisis”? And if so, who is causing it, the executive branch or the judiciary?
On May 18, 2025, we held an online webinar on the battle between Article III (the judiciary) and Article II (the Executive Branch) which has dominated the news since Trump started his second term.
Dating back to just after the 2024 election, Democrats organized, financed, and staffed (with hundreds of lawyers) a plan to bury Trump 2.0 in litigation over everything in an attempt to sabotage, or at least stall, his presidency. And we have seen it unfold in over 300 cases including some crazy district court temporary restraining orders, many of which have been stayed on appeal but still bought The Resistance weeks of relief it didn’t deserve. Whether the executive branch or the judiciary is overstepping its boundaries is driving much of politics.
We discussed the executive branch’s attempt to deal with illegal immigration, particularly the attempt to remove gang members, and the Executive Orders and other actions taken concerning education, and the litigations and court ruling attempting to prevent funding cut offs and reform.
Our Panel was: Professor William Jacobson, President and founder of the Legal Insurrection Foundation (LIF) and Clinical Law Professor at Cornell Law School; Professor Glenn Reynolds, Beauchamp Brogan Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Tennessee College of Law; and Will Chamberlain, Senior Counsel at the Article III Project. Kemberlee Kaye was the moderator.
More about the panelists is available here.
The full video is at the bottom of this post. (Regrets, no transcript.)
You can jump ahead to these bookmarks of initial presentations:
My Introduction of the Panelists and Overview (3:20)
Prof. Glenn Reynolds (5:50)
Will Chamberlain (16:20)
Pro. William Jacobson (29:20)
Questions and Answers (39:35)
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Everything relies on convention. That started to fall apart with Gore in 2000. Nixon knew that if you lost an election through fraud, you lost. Finality was more important than accuracy. Gore reversed that and the founding convention was lost forever, and now we have neither accuracy nor finality in elections.
If you lose to a cheater you lose?
No.
And yet this idiocy got us the Biden insanity. They even gloated that they’d done it.
Nixon should have fought when Kennedy and the Dems cheated the first time.
Nixon gave us 40 more years of uncontested elections. The narrative is that they’re fair and accurate. The fact is that if it’s close enough to win by cheating, then as far as democracy goes, it doesn’t matter much which way it goes. So it’s a working system.