Turley Gives Keynote Address on Supreme Court at Christopher Newport University

Today I have the pleasure of giving a keynote address on the Supreme Court at Christopher Newport University on the 15th anniversary of its Center on American Studies. I will be speaking at 4:30 and the keynote is entitled “Dangerous Times for the “Least Dangerous Branch”: The Supreme Court in the Age of Rage.”  I will later give a dinner address on “Free speech and Higher Education: The Struggle Over Viewpoint Diversity on College Campuses.”

Speakers at the conference will also include

Harvey Klehr, Andrew W. Mellon Professor Emeritus, Department of Political Science, Emory University

Bonnie Snyder, Former Director of K-12 Programs at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education

Mark Bauerlein, Senior Editor at First Things, Professor Emeritus of English at Emory University

Keith Whittington, William E. Nelson Professor of Politics, Princeton University

Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale University

It is an honor to appear with these distinguished speakers.

I have previously spoken at CNU and have been impressed by the incredible growth of this vibrant university. This is a special and positive academic environment. I have always been impressed with the close relationship of faculty to the students and the high level of energy and engagement at the university.

It is a great pleasure to return to Christopher Newport University today.

5 thoughts on “Turley Gives Keynote Address on Supreme Court at Christopher Newport University”

  1. Professor Turley, ask them this: Where the —- is the Supreme Court?

    Why don’t Justices fulfill their sworn oaths to “support” the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    Why Doesn’t the Supreme Court Keep America on the Constitution?

    Why doesn’t the Supreme Court exercise its power of Judicial Review with fidelity to the literal, not interpreted (i.e. amended), Constitution?

    The Fed raised rates, what, the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve Board are unconstitutional as principles of the diametrically opposed, anti-constitution communist manifesto.

    Redistribution of wealth and the welfare state are unconstitutional.

    Regulation is unconstitutional.

    “Emergency Powers” are unconstitutional.





    Call the cops on the anti-constitution communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) – all they do is cheat.

    The Supreme Court must now put on the docket the “Achilles Heel” case and strike down all unconstitutional acts in one fell swoop through its charge, Judicial Review.

    Once Americans perceive that the literal clear and evident meaning and intent of the Constitution will be vigorously supported, the desire to ignore, violate and nullify the Constitution will soon self-resolve.

    There is no Praetorian Guard for the Constitution.

    There is Judicial Review.

    The Power of Judicial Review

    Marshall’s opinion established that the Supreme Court has the authority, under the Supremacy Clause and Article III, § 2 of the Constitution, to review legislative or executive acts and find them unconstitutional, i.e., the power of judicial review.

    – Cornell Law School

    Judicial Review in the United States

    The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

    – DOJ, Office of Justice Programs


      “The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”

      “I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”

      “I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”

      – Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861

  2. He is not going to post the speech before he gives it. If he did, why would anyone attend?

  3. He’s not going to post the speech before he gives it. If he did, why would anyone attend?

Comments are closed.