Welcome to Who Decides Who Decides?
Welcome!
Welcome to Who Decides Who Decides?
There has never been a better — or more necessary — moment to pay close attention to constitutional law.
Not constitutional law as an abstraction. Not the dry recitation of clauses and doctrines. But constitutional law as it is actually lived. The Constitution is not a museum piece. It is a living set of constraints on power — and right now, those constraints are being tested in ways without modern precedent. Whether they hold is the story of our moment.
The fundamental question of constitutional law is “who decides?” James Madison’s answer was both clear and challenging. Decision-making should not rest with a single person or a direct faction. That’s what this publication is about.
What you’ll find here
I’ve spent my career thinking carefully about the relationship between law and political power. I believe that rigorous legal analysis and accessible communication need not be in conflict — that it is possible to explain the law without either dumbing it down or burying it in jargon.
Each week, I’ll publish one or more pieces on contemporary constitutional and legal developments. Some will be longer analytical essays — the kind of deep dive that tries to put a current controversy in its full legal and historical context. Others will be shorter, faster takes on breaking developments. Occasionally, I’ll sit down with lawyers, scholars, commentators, and citizens who are living these issues up close.
The throughlines will be simple convictions: that the law matters, that the Constitution means something, and that understanding both is a form of civic sustenance.
A few things I want to be clear about
This publication is free. Everything I write will be available to every subscriber at no cost. If you find value in the work and want to support it, there is a voluntary option to do so — and I’m genuinely grateful for it — but it will not be a condition of access. The goal here is to elevate our discourse, not to generate revenue.
I also want to be honest about what this is and isn’t. This is not a news publication. I won’t be breaking stories. What I will try to do is help you understand the stories that are already breaking — to cut through the noise, place events in their proper legal and constitutional context, and to consider – with you and others - what matters and why.
And I’ll be direct about where I stand. I believe that democracy is a collective responsibility. I believe in the separation of powers. I believe that no president of either party is above the law, and that an executive branch that treats legal constraints as optional is a threat to the constitutional order, not an expression of it. These are not partisan positions. They are the foundational commitments of the American republic. I’ll defend them accordingly.
I’m glad you’re here. I’m grateful you’re engaged. Here and everywhere.
— James
If someone forwarded this to you and you’d like to subscribe, you can do so below. If you find the work valuable, please share it with someone who would.
