In a U.S. Supreme Court opinion written between the passage of the 14th Amendment and when the Court started “incorporating” the Bill of Rights against the states, the Court upheld the conviction and $10 fine against Herman Presser. Presser had led a group of about 400 armed people calling themselves Lehr und Wehr Verein (The Teaching and Defense Association), a pro-labor socialist group, in a parade through Chicago. In what must have quite the spectacle, Presser led the parade on a horse and carried a cavalry sword. Such armed parades were against Illinois law. Sometimes this case is cited, erroneously, by gun control advocates. Find out why.
Just this week, a unanimous D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out a lawsuit filed by over 200 members of Congress alleging Donald Trump is in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. The court held the members of Congress did not have standing to bring the lawsuit. So this week, we discuss the Emoluments Clause itself and the concept of judicial “standing.” What does they mean? Check out this week’s edition of The Law for the answer.
This 5-4 Supreme Court decision—which struck down a state regulation that made it a crime to allow an employee to work more than 60 hours a week as a violation of an individual’s liberty to contract—is largely ridiculed in law schools today and by modern central planners. Find out why.
Birthright citizenship and the 14th Amendment have been in the news recently. President Trump does not believe birthright citizenship is required by the 14th Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court discussed the issue in some detail in an 1898 case, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.