Mr. Trump Should Take Constitutional Law 101

OPINION: The GOP nominee said he'll solve problems like violent crime — alone. But it's not that simple.

, The National Law Journal

   | 7 Comments

OPINION: The GOP nominee said he'll solve problems like violent crime — alone. But it's not that simple.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Bright Quang

    if our foreign assistance Act‘s 22 U.S.C. Sec.2451, in which is performed exactly by our government of the United States of America, that our world is peaceful more than the wars. As a result, our nation could not lose 400.M

  • Steven Shonder

    By coincidence, there was an article in the Chicago Tribune, written by Eric Zorn, which noted that the media is mischaracterizing Trump‘s "I alone" comment to mean that he "alone" could fix "all" the country‘s problems. In fact, he was merely referring to the problems of political influence peddling. So, it appears that Mr. Morrison does not have his facts straight on this one.

  • Alex Simpson

    Yes, all presidential candidates make promises they can‘t deliver due to separation of powers. However, it seems that some voters need to be reminded of this more than others, namely Mr. Trump‘s voters and Mr. Sanders‘ voters. The reason both men were able to capitalize on the anger and frustration that many Americans feel today is that they both made wild promises of what THEY, as individuals, would do should they be elected. While HRC has certainly made promises that she‘ll need help from Congress and/or the states to deliver, she has never said that she "alone" can fix our problems, as Trump has said. Should Trump take Con Law 101? What‘s the point? He doesn‘t deal in reality. But maybe his supporters should at least sit in on a class or two.

  • Alex Wright

    Misguided as Trump seems to be, he is hardly unique is speaking of an array of economic, foreign policy and other ills that are beyond the fetch of a president. Setting aside extravagant claims made by candidates in the past, the same article could be written about claims of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders. It is always regrettable when knowledgeable writers like Mr. Morrison pretend to objectivity when in fact their grievances are with a party or candidate, and not with a principle that, if appleid in the current election, would subsume all candidates.

  • Joel Zingeser

    I’m not a lawyer let alone a Constitutional scholar. To me the key point to this article and discussion is that we do have the Constitution and the wonderfully conceived system of checks and balances. It is imperative that we get back to governing accordingly. My hope is that the Constitution will protect us from any demagogue who might enter government through the office of the presidency and think he can draw upon what seems to be a recent trend of erosion of the balance of powers to such an extent that his vision is to declare sovereignty. America is great – let’s do things accordingly.

  • Adam Smith

    Dean Morrison, for the sake of deal-making, I‘ll overlook the fact that parasitic shysters are among your biggest fans and get straight to my proposition: The Donald will agree to take and pass Con Law 101 if every Democrat seeking state and federal government agrees to take and pass Econ 101. After all, a doubling of the minimum wage will cost low-skill minority jobseekers any hope of landing an entry-level position that could start them on their way to upward mobility, more regulations serve only to grow compliance and litigation costs while slowing business investment and GDP growth further, and refusing to reform the tax code with a significantly lower corporate rate only repels foreign investment and drives U.S. jobs overseas. I could go on and on with other examples of Democrats‘ apparent ignorance of basic economics, but surely you and NLJ readers get my point.

  • B. Lobner

    Interesting to read one professor opine that Mr. Trump will have to follow federal law which would prohibit him from accomplishing what he says he will do if elected. Too bad Mr. Morrison doesn‘t comment on the fact that the Obama administration has refused to enforce the immigration laws. Does he have two standards? I presume he must support Mrs. Clinton.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202763991634

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.