Reading the point/counterpoint posts on the question of how the supreme court would decide on Obamacares constitutionality, was quite disturbing to me in several ways. On the one hand I was heartened, because clearly both Brad and Doug are sane and rational folks with a reasonably solid background in both law and politics, and a [...]

Earlier this week, Brad Warbiany started out the latest in our occasional series of Point-Counterpoint exchanges by arguing that the Supreme Court will ultimately uphold the Constitutionality of the Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate. I’ll start off by saying that this is not an all implausible. Indeed, I’ve argued myself in the [...]

This is part of The Liberty Papers’ continuing Point/Counterpoint series, where two contributors (or a contributor and a guest) argue competing sides of an issue. In this installment, I will argue that the Supreme Court has a realistic defensible argument to find the Individual Mandate in ObamaCare Constitutional. Tomorrow, Doug Mataconis will respond with a [...]

This is part of The Liberty Papers’ continued Point/Counterpoint feature. Specifically, this Counterpoint is the response to Jeff Molby’s post yesterday suggesting moral equivalency between Arabs cheering in the streets after 9/11 and Americans cheering Sunday night at the killing of Osama bin Laden. ———————————————— A lot of what Jeff said yesterday made sense. We [...]

The following is a continuation of The Liberty Papers’ “Point/Counterpoint” series. In this feature, two contributors (or, as in this case, a contributor and a guest) of semi-like mind debate a specific point of view. Today’s Point is provided by regular reader and commenter Jeff Molby, who wrote in response to a friend and offered [...]

In his post that started this debate, Brad Warbiany makes this point about the idea that the individual states have the power, or at least the right, to make declarations as to the Constitutionality of Federal laws: Nullification is the civil disobedience of Federalism. Is it legal? No. After all, the Supremacy Clause and judicial [...]

This post is a part of our continuing series Point/Counterpoint. I am taking the position that state Nullification of federal law is a legitimate action, and Doug Mataconis will respond tomorrow with a rebuttal. In memory of James Kilpatrick, we’ll dedicate this installment to him. In federal politics, states are party to an uneasy compact [...]

This is a segment in The Liberty Papers’ continuing “Point/Counterpoint” series. This post is the rebuttal to my co-contributor Michael Powell’s post here, making the point that “states’ rights” are an antiquated and poisoned concept. When I saw Michael’s post this morning, I was a little bit surprised. I was expecting him to make the [...]

This is a post in our continuing “Point/Counterpoint” series, where TLP contributors and/or guest posters debate a topic. In this installment, Michael Powell argues against the existence of “states’ rights”. Tomorrow, Brad Warbiany will defend states’ rights, and his post can now be found here. During the twentieth century, there were several confrontations between federal [...]

This post is the second portion of a feature we offer here at The Liberty Papers called “Point-Counterpoint”. In this feature, Kevin argued the Point yesterday that Tea Parties are ultimately damaging to the libertarian movement. Today, Brad responds with the below. My boss is a mainstream Republican in his mid-40′s. He’s got a small [...]

This post is the opening salvo of a feature we occasionally offer here at The Liberty Papers called “Point-Counterpoint”. In this feature, Kevin is arguing the Point that Tea Parties are ultimately damaging to the libertarian movement. Tomorrow, Brad will respond to this argument with his Counterpoint (response here). The so-called Tea Party movement has [...]

In his opening post, our Guest Blogger Derek Hammer states that the United States Constitution is, and should be considered to be, a living document. In at least one interpretation of that phrase, I agree with him. As we sit here, less than three months shy of the 220th anniversary of the date that the [...]

In the United States, a document–the Constitution of the United States, the Supreme Law of the Land–binds us, the people, when we are granted citizenship. By becoming citizens of this great nation, we assure ourselves the protections outlined by this document. Unfortunately, many citizens forget these inalienable rights. However, there are some that have not. [...]

(Responding to Brad Warbiany’s post here) After reading Brad’s arguments opposed to interventionism, I found many more areas of agreement than I expected. Brad makes the point that he does not favor isolationism or pacifism and points out that force is sometimes justified, though he does not explain the circumstances where he believes force or [...]

Time for the inaugural Point/Counterpoint. The topic will be a debate between the philosophy of a non-interventionist foreign policy versus the policy of fighting the war on terror through an offensive military war to expand freedom in the Middle East. It’s been suggested that the case for non-interventionism should be the opening case, which I [...]

No, not the soon-to-be regular feature of this site, where one of us debates another one; this one is in response to some of the responses to yesterdays events. Yesterday, a horrendous attack was carried out by a lone, crazed individual at Virgina Tech. 33 people (including the mass murderer) are dead, with dozens more [...]

As Doug mentioned Monday night, we here at The Liberty Papers have been brainstorming some interesting new features here. One, that we will roll out shortly (likely before the end of the week) is called Point/Counterpoint. While our contributors generally agree on most issues, there are always issues where we don’t. We all share a [...]