We the People

Bestselling biographer Walter Isaacson dives into the meaning of the Declaration's second sentence, revealing how 'we' echoes social contract theory from thinkers like Locke. He discusses Franklin's impactful edit of 'self-evident,' grounded in reason, and tackles the founders' contradictions on equality and slavery. The conversation also branches into whether AI can restore civil discourse and the need for an economy focused on the common good, reflective of Franklin's civic ideals.

In this discussion, Samuel Estreicher, a public law expert from NYU, and John Yoo, an authority on executive power from UC Berkeley, dive into the legality of Trump's tariffs. They analyze whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act allows such extensive tariffs. The conversation touches on key legal concepts like the major questions doctrine and non-delegation concerns, highlighting the potential for the Supreme Court to strike down these tariffs. Insights into statutory dilemmas and alternative approaches are also shared.

This installment features Stephen Knott, a historian and author, and Ron Chernow, the celebrated biographer behind the musical phenomenon. They dive into Hamilton's complex legacy, exploring whether he was a closet monarchist or a visionary nationalist. Topics include Hamilton’s warnings about demagogues, the contrasts between his and Jefferson's visions for America, and the profound impact of Chernow's biography on modern culture. The discussion also touches on the linguistic style that makes Hamilton’s story ripe for hip-hop adaptation.

Join Jeffrey Rosen, a constitutional expert and author, in a thought-provoking conversation with Jeffrey Goldberg, Editor-in-Chief of The Atlantic. They explore the intense rivalry between Hamilton and Jefferson and its impact on American governance. The duo delves into civic education in the digital age, the role of citizens in sustaining democracy, and how past presidents engaged with foundational texts. They also contemplate modern threats to democracy from social media and discuss whether Hamilton would support today’s executive powers.

In this bonus episode, we’re sharing a live conversation with Jeffrey Rosen, Joanne Freeman, George F. Will, and Sean Wilentz exploring Rosen’s new book, which is out this week: The Pursuit of Liberty: How Hamilton vs. Jefferson Ignited the Lasting Battle Over Power in America. Their conversation explores how the opposing constitutional visions of Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton have defined the nation since its founding and continued to drive today’s debates over the balance between liberty and power.  This conversation was originally recorded on February 22, 2025, as part of the NCC’s President’s Council Retreat in Miami, FL.  Resources  Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Liberty: How Hamilton vs. Jefferson Ignited the Lasting Battle Over Power in America, (2025)  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Explore the⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate⁠⁠⁠

In this episode, William Banks of Syracuse University College of Law and Laura Dickinson of the George Washington Law School join to discuss the history and meaning of the Insurrection Act, which authorizes the president to deploy the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement purposes. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates.     Resources Illinois v. Trump (N.D. Illinois, 2025)  United States v. Cruikshank (1875)  Martin v. Mott (1827)  William Banks and Stephen Dycus, Soldiers on the Home Front: The Domestic Role of the American Military (2016)  William Banks, “Providing ‘Supplemental Security’ – The Insurrection Act and the Military Role in Responding to Domestic Crises,” Journal of National Security Law & Policy (12/15/2009)  Laura Dickinson, “Protecting the U.S. National Security State from a Rogue President,” Harvard National Security Journal (1/9/2025)  Laura Dickinson, “How the Insurrection Act (Properly Understood) Limits Domestic Deployments of the U.S. Military,” Lawfare (9/12/2024)    In our new podcast, Pursuit: The Founders’ Guide to Happiness, Jeffrey Rosen explores the founders’ lives with the historians who know them best. Plus, filmmaker Ken Burns shares his daily practice of self-reflection.  Listen to episodes of Pursuit on ⁠Apple Podcast⁠ and ⁠Spotify⁠.  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr ⁠⁠⁠⁠ Explore the⁠⁠⁠ ⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate⁠⁠⁠

Join legal experts Stephanie Barclay, a Georgetown law professor specializing in free speech and religious exercise, and Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of UC Berkeley School of Law and renowned constitutional scholar. They dive into the contentious Colorado ban on conversion therapy and its implications for the First Amendment. Key discussions include whether this ban constitutes viewpoint discrimination, the balance of state power in regulating medical standards, and the complex intersection of free speech and professional conduct in therapy practices.

Join Sarah Isgur, a legal commentator and SCOTUSblog editor, alongside Steve Vladeck, Georgetown law professor and Supreme Court expert, as they delve into the 20-year legacy of the Roberts Court. They discuss public perception and legitimacy amid rising partisanship. Explore the tension between judicial restraint and active agenda-shaping, plus the implications of major upcoming cases, including tariffs and executive powers. With insights on judicial dynamics and accountability, this conversation reveals the intricate balance the Court navigates in today's polarized landscape.

In this episode, Genevieve Lakier of the University of Chicago Law School and Eugene Volokh of the UCLA School of Law join to discuss the recent suspension of Jimmy Kimmel by ABC and the broader history and constitutionality of jawboning, the practice of government officials pressuring private actors to stifle speech.    Resources National Rifle Association v. Vullo (2024)  Murthy v. Missouri (2024)  Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan (1963)  Rust v. Sullivan (1991)  Genevieve Lakier, “Enforcing the First Amendment in an Era of Jawboning,” University of Chicago Law Review, Forthcoming 2026  Eugene Volokh, “Jimmy Kimmel, the NRA, and the First Amendment,” Volokh Conspiracy, September 18, 2025   In our new podcast, Pursuit: The Founders’ to Guide to Happiness Jeffrey Rosen explores the founders’ lives with the historians who know them best. Plus, filmmaker Ken Burns shares his daily practice of self-reflection.  Listen to episodes of Pursuit on Apple Podcast and Spotify.  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠ ⁠Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr ⁠ Explore the⁠ America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠ ⁠Sign up⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming⁠ ⁠⁠live program⁠ or watch recordings on⁠ ⁠⁠YouTube⁠ Support our important work:  ⁠Donate  

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a U.S. Supreme Court associate justice and author of *Listening to the Law*, shares insights from her legal journey and constitutional philosophy. She discusses growing up in New Orleans and the lessons from her family life. Barrett highlights her experiences with Justice Scalia and her commitment to originalism, emphasizing the importance of public meaning in constitutional interpretation. She also addresses the need for civility and collaboration in legal debates, advocating for a more humble approach to overcoming polarization.