Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

New twist in West Virginia’s constitutional standoff

An epic balance-of-powers fight in West Virginia has taken a new turn.

Last summer, the state House impeached the entire state Supreme Court after evidence surfaced of justices lavishly renovating their offices and otherwise misusing taxpayer money. But just before the state Senate was to open the impeachment trials in October, a temporary high court assembled from retired judges called the proceedings to a halt, ruling them an unconstitutional overstepping of legislative powers.

This week the legislators opened a new line of attack, advancing legislation in the state House Judiciary Committee that would withhold the retirement benefits of the judges who ruled against them last fall – at least until they changed their minds.


Proponents, mostly Republicans, argue the move is an appropriate way to combat judicial overreach. Opponents, mostly Democrats, say it's wrong to fight judicial overreach with legislative overreach.

"Now there are no longer in this state three co-equal branches. We have one branch that believes it's superior and it did so with that decision. We cannot let that decision stand as law," said GOP state Rep. Pat McGeehan.

"The idea that we as one branch of government would hold the retirement of another branch hostage unless they decide a case the way we want them to decide is a dangerous step," countered Democratic state Rep. Chad Lovejoy.

Read More

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

Keep ReadingShow less
For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

Praying outdoors

ImagineGolf/Getty Images

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

Keep ReadingShow less