Podcast appearances and mentions of josh chafetz

Live from the University of Michigan, Sarah Isgur and David French are joined by law professors Josh Chafetz, Aaron Nielson, Jennifer Mascott, and other special guests, to explain Humphrey's Executor and the executive power of removal. The Agenda: —Myers v. United States —Humphrey's Executor v. United States —Peekaboo —The “illimitable power of removal” —Was Madison right about “liquidation”? —Congressional accountability —Civil service reform —Justice Barrett Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A Federal District Court has temporarily halted an executive order from President Trump that purports to halt wide swaths of federal spending.  This impoundment of funds duly appropriated by Congress may violate the Constitution as well as federal statutes.  We bring an expert on the relationship between Congress and the Presidency, Professor Josh Chafetz, and he takes us back to 17th century and Britain, through the American founding, into the early republic, and indeed into the presidency of Richard Nixon to give a full historical and originalist background.  But there's more, with modern statutes, Supreme Court cases, structural analysis - in short, everything.  And for good measure, we dive a little deeper into some statements by Vice President Vance which seem to suggest that he thinks the President is not bound by the Supreme Court's decisions and orders.  Professor Amar appeared on CNN to discuss this, and now he expands on those comments.  Lots of depth in this episode, and as usual, CLE credit is available for lawyers and judges by visiting podcast.njsba.com.

Could Republicans in the House conspire with a 2025 President Trump to manufacture a forced Senate recess in an effort to bypass the advise and consent appointments process?  The much-anticipated article in The Atlantic has been published, to widespread approval.  We proudly present all three co-authors of this article in a wide-ranging, nuanced, fascinating discussion, as Professors Josh Chafetz, Tom Schmidt, and of course Akhil Amar reunite to take us from Restoration England to the chambers of the Supreme Court where Professor Schmidt clerked for Justice Breyer, the author of the principal case on recess appointments, NLRB v. Noel Canning, in 2014.  We hear how that case has lessons, and yet is distinguished, from the scenario here, and what might happen if the contemplated maneuvers, deemed grossly unconstitutional by our experts, try it anyway.  CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.

Guests: Sherrilyn Ifill, Josh Chafetz, Maria Hinojosa, Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez The cabinet picks keep on coming—and Republican alarm over Matt Gaetz is growing. Tonight: Sherrilyn Ifill on what's at stake with Donald Trump's picks to run DOJ. Then, new concern over a Trump plan to dissolve the Senate's constitutional role to install his scandalous picks. Plus, Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington on her unlikely win—and what Democrats can learn from it. And the perfect encapsulation of how bad information spreads by way Aaron Rodgers and a five interception game. Want more of Chris? Download and subscribe to his podcast, “Why Is This Happening? The Chris Hayes podcast” wherever you get your podcasts.

Adam White and Jace Lington talk with Josh Chafetz and Noah Rosenblum about some of the big administrative law cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. They discuss the state of the Court, where things might be headed next, and problems with conservative critiques of the Administrative State. Notes: Noah Rosenblum, What We Talk About […]

Adam White and Jace Lington talk with Josh Chafetz and Noah Rosenblum about some of the big administrative law cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. They discuss the state of the Court, where things might be headed next, and problems with conservative critiques of the Administrative State.Notes:Noah Rosenblum, What We Talk About When We Talk About the Rule of Law in the Administrative State, New York University Journal of Law & Liberty, Vol. 16, No. 3 (2023)Josh Chafetz, The New Judicial Power Grab, St. Louis University Law Journal, Vol. 67 (2023)CFPB v. CFAS, Brief of Professors of History and Constitutional Law as Amici Curiae (2023)Beau J. Baumann, Americana Administrative Law, Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 111 (2023)Nikolas Bowie & Daphna Renan, The Separation-of-Powers Counterrevolution, Vol. 131, No. 7 (2022)Ashraf Ahmed, Lev Menand, Noah Rosenblum, The Tragedy of Presidential Administration, Gray Center Working Paper, 2021Josh Chafetz, Congress's Constitution (2019)Leah Litman, Debunking Antinovelty, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 66, No. 7 (2017)Kent Barnett & Christopher J. Walker, Chevron in the Circuit Courts, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 116, No. 1 (2017)Daniel R. Ernst, Tocqueville's Nightmare, Oxford University Press (2014)Richard E. Neustadt, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents (1991)

Last week, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California became the Speaker of the House, after 15 rounds of voting. It was the first time since 1923 that a Speaker was not elected on the first ballot. In this episode, we are joined by scholars Matthew Green, author of The Speaker of the House: A Study of Leadership, and Josh Chafetz, author of Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers, to discuss the role and the history of this powerful constitutional office. They also discuss some of the most notable Speakers throughout history, from Henry Clay to Joe Cannon to Nancy Pelosi, and how their legacies helped shaped the House and Congress as we know it.  Host Jeffrey Rosen moderates.  Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

From June 9, 2020: High profile congressional hearings, like the 2015 Benghazi hearings, the 2019 Mueller Report hearings and most recently, the Ukraine impeachment proceedings are often described in derogatory terms like "political theater," "spectacle" or "circus." But do these exaggerated performances on Capitol Hill actually serve a constitutional purpose? Margaret Taylor sat down with Josh Chafetz, a law professor and author of the book "Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers." They talked about his most recent article, in which he argues that congressional overspeech, like congressional oversight, is actually an important tool of constitutional politics, even if it doesn't automatically produce good outcomes.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this month, President Biden voiced support for getting rid of the filibuster, looking to ease the path of voting rights legislation in Congress. But Senators Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema opposed the change. The legislation has been stalled, and debate over the filibuster runs high once again.  Joining host Jeffrey Rosen to discuss the history, constitutionality, and calls for reform of the filibuster are two of the nation's leading experts on congressional power and practices. Josh Chafetz is a professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, and Jay Cost is the Gerald R. Ford nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. His newest book is James Madison: America's First Politician. The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. In honor of the 234th anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, every dollar you give to support the We the People podcast campaign will be doubled with a generous 1:1 match up to a total of $234,000, made possible by the John Templeton Foundation! Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support.   Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Earlier this month, President Biden voiced support for getting rid of the filibuster, looking to ease the path of voting rights legislation in Congress. But Senators Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema opposed the change. The legislation has been stalled, and debate over the filibuster runs high once again.  Joining host Jeffrey Rosen to discuss the history, constitutionality, and calls for reform of the filibuster are two of the nation's leading experts on congressional power and practices. Josh Chafetz is a professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, and Jay Cost is the Gerald R. Ford nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. His newest book is James Madison: America's First Politician. The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. In honor of the 234th anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, every dollar you give to support the We the People podcast campaign will be doubled with a generous 1:1 match up to a total of $234,000, made possible by the John Templeton Foundation! Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support.   Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

  Summary Josh Chafetz, D.Phil., JD, of the Georgetown University Law Center, joins McConnell Center Director Dr. Gary L. Gregg II to discuss his recent book on congressional powers. Chafetz argues that congress has numerous powers at its disposal to compete with those of other branches. He will be giving a virtual lecture hosted by the McConnell Center on his book Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority & the Separation of Powers at 6:00 PM on April 14. Registration is required. Links Mentioned Josh Chafetz, Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers Register for Josh Chafetz’s April 14 lecture here Stay Connected Visit us at McConnellcenter.org Subscribe to our newsletter  Facebook: @mcconnellcenter Instagram: @ulmcenter  Twitter: @ULmCenter This podcast is a production of the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville. Views expressed in this show are those of the participants and not necessarily those of the McConnell Center.    

The executive branch's bureaucracy gets a lot of attention. But Congress's bureaucracy gets much less—yet it is extremely important. In a new Gray Center working paper titled “ The Congressional Bureaucracy,” Professors Abbe Gluck and Jesse Cross analyze several parts of Congress's bureaucracy—some well-known, like the Government Accountability Office, and others less so, like the Office of Law... Source

The executive branch’s bureaucracy gets a lot of attention. But Congress’s bureaucracy gets much less—yet it is extremely important. In a new Gray Center working paper titled “The Congressional Bureaucracy,” Professors Abbe Gluck and Jesse Cross analyze several parts of Congress’s bureaucracy—some well-known, like the Government Accountability Office, and others less so, like the Office […]Join the conversation and comment on this podcast episode: https://ricochet.com/podcast/arbitrary-capricious/thinking-about-the-congressional-bureaucracy-with-abbe-gluck-jesse-cross-and-josh-chafetz-congress-and-the-administrative-state-series/.Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing: https://ricochet.com/membership/.Subscribe to Arbitrary & Capricious in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

In this episode, I discuss the congressional politics of the court vacancy. Here are the relevant links from each point. Point #1- There’s no chance a Justice won’t be confirmed if there are 50 votes for the justice. You almost certainly can’t stop this procedurally if you are the Democrats. James Wallner discussing the procedures for confirming a judicial nomination. My tweetstorm on the Senate rules regarding the requirement of holding an impeachment trial. My tweetstorm on the problems with denying a quorum. My tweetstorm on shaping understandings rather than preventing actions. Point #2 – And there’s almost certainly going to be 50 votes. Electorally vulnerable Senators just aren’t going to break with the party here. My old post on how opinion polls about policy don’t translate to votes. Point #3 – Parties don’t simply have a goal of maximizing their seats in Congress. Anthony Downs’ theory of party competition. Point #4 – Hardball politics is both new and not new. Josh Chafetz’s on unprecedented things in judicial nominations. Me on hardball politics and what’s new and not new. Mark Tushnet on Constitutional hardball. Francis Lee on insecure majorities and party competition. Matt Green on hardball politics in Congress, then and now. The Washington Post […]

Josh and Matt talk with Josh Chafetz, Professor of Law at Georgetown University, to talk Congress, its power, and the potential for filibuster reform in the Senate.

High profile congressional hearings, like the 2015 Benghazi hearings, the 2019 Mueller Report hearings and most recently, the Ukraine impeachment proceedings are often described in derogatory terms like "political theater," "spectacle" or "circus." But do these exaggerated performances on Capitol Hill actually serve a constitutional purpose? Margaret Taylor sat down with Josh Chafetz, a law professor and author of the book "Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers." They talked about his most recent article, in which he argues that congressional overspeech, like congressional oversight, is actually an important tool of constitutional politics, even if it doesn't automatically produce good outcomes.

Host and AEI Scholar Adam White talks with Cornell law professor Josh Chafetz about Congress: its limits, its powers, and its purpose The post https://www.aei.org/multimedia/the-first-episode-the-first-branch/ (The first episode, the first branch) appeared first on https://www.aei.org (American Enterprise Institute - AEI).

Today's episode breaks down force majeure clauses in contracts and takes a look at what might happen in the next few weeks as the world prepares to deal with COVID-19 coronavirus. Along the way we also tackle the news of the week, including the baffling decision out of the DC Circuit not to require Don McGahn to testify. You won't want to miss this episode! We begin, however, with some recurring Vice Presidential/line of succession questions and take a mini-deep-dive into the absolutely bonkers elections of 1796 and 1800 that produced the 12th Amendment, and what it says about vice-presidential qualifications. After that, it's time for our main segment on coronavirus, which includes a deep dive into various cases where contracts have been broken due to "acts of god." Is a global pandemic an "act of god?" Listen, find out, and you'll soon be able to whip out four-part tests if your hotel tries to cancel your room due to coronavirus scares. Then, it's time to pick apart the D.C. Circuit's 2-1 baffling opinion that the House Oversight Committee lacks standing to go to a court to enforce its subpoena over Don McGahn. This is technically an "Andrew Was Wrong," because Andrew did not imagine that any judges with functioning brain cells could have authored an opinion this bad. Find out what's next! After all that, it's time for a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam involving a tainted witness identification. And remember that you too can play along by sharing out this episode on social media and using the hashtag #T3BE. Appearances None! If you’d like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links For all your Vice Presidential qualification questions, check out the 12th Amendment! Here's the D.C. Circuit's decision in McGahn, and we also referenced Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (1997) and, of course, Opening Arguments's good friend Richard Nixon in United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 696-97 (1974). Finally, you can read Josh Chafetz's law review article, "Executive Branch Contempt of Congress." -Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law -Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs -Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community! -For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki -Remember to check out our YouTube Channel  for Opening Arguments: The Briefs and other specials! -And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

House committees, among others, have been trying to get President Donald Trump’s tax returns and other financial documents, and have turned to the courts to enforce the effort. Why doesn’t Congress use its own enforcement? Cornell law professor Josh Chafetz thinks the legislative branch has ceded too much power to the judicial branch. He points to the Nixon tapes effort in the 1970s as a significant turning point, when Congress went to courts for the first time in an information dispute with the executive branch. He talks with Bloomberg Tax legal reporter Aysha Bagchi about the arguments he makes in his book, Congress’s Constitution, and speculates on how the cases may play out.

Josh Chafetz, a professor at Cornell Law School, argued in a New York Times op-ed this week that House Democrats should consider arresting Trump administration officials and members of the president’s inner circle in order to compel the White House’s cooperation with the impeachment inquiry. Read the article here!

In this episode, I discuss the politics of impeachment. Here are the relevant links from each point. Point #1- The Constitution is clear about impeachment, but not specific. My review of Josh Chafetz’s book, Congress’s Constitution. James Wallner discussing conflict on Ezra Klein’s podcast. CRS report on impeachment and removal. Bob Bauer on whether there need be a Senate trial. Henry Olson on McConnell controlling a trial. Point #2 – Impeachment is thoroughly political, and takes place in the public sphere of opinion, which is both an input and output. Ariel Edwards-Levy is the person to follow for polling info on impeachment. Dubious polls about hypothetical scenarios? Me on why Congress doesn’t always “do the right thing.” Dave Hopkins on the impact of impeachments on public opinion. Point #3 – The groups to watch are the moderate House Dems, moderate House Republicans, and Senate Republicans. Sarah Binder’s great charts of House Dems. Some GOP Senators are very quiet. Jonathan Bernstein sees a slight shift in GOP Senate opinion. Point #4 – Elite political opinion, especially among elected officials moves in cascades. Lee Drutman’s Vox article on cascades. The Washington Post Op-ed from seven freshmen Democrats. Point #5 – We don’t […]

Renato and Patti discuss the Trump Administration’s strategy of stonewalling all subpoenas for documents issued by Congress as part of its oversight responsibilities. They are joined by Josh Chafetz, Professor of Law at Cornell Law School.

In both the House and the Senate, it has become extremely difficult to build consensus, which in turn creates gridlock, dysfunction, and partisanship.Does Congress need to reform its processes altogether? Or should it return to earlier methods of committees, conferencing, and compromise? Machalagh Carr, Josh Chafetz, David Schoenbrod, and David Hoppe reflect on the processes of Congress which enable the legislative branch to effectively wield its constitutional powers.Watch the video on YouTubeProf. Josh Chafetz, Professor of Law, Cornell Law SchoolDavid Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. David Schoenbrod, Professor of Law, New York Law SchoolModerator: Machalagh Carr, General Counsel & Parliamentarian, Committee on Ways and Means, U. S. House of RepresentativesAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

In both the House and the Senate, it has become extremely difficult to build consensus, which in turn creates gridlock, dysfunction, and partisanship.Does Congress need to reform its processes altogether? Or should it return to earlier methods of committees, conferencing, and compromise? Machalagh Carr, Josh Chafetz, David Schoenbrod, and David Hoppe reflect on the processes of Congress which enable the legislative branch to effectively wield its constitutional powers.Watch the video on YouTubeProf. Josh Chafetz, Professor of Law, Cornell Law SchoolDavid Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesProf. David Schoenbrod, Professor of Law, New York Law SchoolModerator: Machalagh Carr, General Counsel & Parliamentarian, Committee on Ways and Means, U. S. House of RepresentativesAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

We end the year by remembering our favorite authors, books, and some of the titles. There were so many great books written this year that we had the fun of reading and talking to a few of the authors. Weve both been doing a lot of grading, so left out as many great books as we mentioned. Please do share your favorites on Twitter/Facebook with #poliscibooks2017. Here are several of the books we mentioned in this weeks podcast: * Josh Chafetz’s Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers * Catherine Zuckert’s Machiavelli’s Politics * Brittany Cooper’s Beyond Respectability: The Intellectual Thought of Race Women * Brian Harrison and Melissa Michelson’s Listen We Need to Talk * David Kinder and Nathan Kalmoe’s Neither Liberal nor Conservative * Anna Law’s The Immigration Battle in American Courts * Alex Hertel-Fernandez’s Politics at Work * David Hopkins’s Red Fighting Blue * Jamila Michener’s Fragmented Democracy: Medicaid, Federalism, and Unequal Politics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We end the year by remembering our favorite authors, books, and some of the titles. There were so many great books written this year that we had the fun of reading and talking to a few of the authors. Weve both been doing a lot of grading, so left out as many great books as we mentioned. Please do share your favorites on Twitter/Facebook with #poliscibooks2017. Here are several of the books we mentioned in this weeks podcast: * Josh Chafetz’s Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers * Catherine Zuckert’s Machiavelli’s Politics * Brittany Cooper’s Beyond Respectability: The Intellectual Thought of Race Women * Brian Harrison and Melissa Michelson’s Listen We Need to Talk * David Kinder and Nathan Kalmoe’s Neither Liberal nor Conservative * Anna Law’s The Immigration Battle in American Courts * Alex Hertel-Fernandez’s Politics at Work * David Hopkins’s Red Fighting Blue * Jamila Michener’s Fragmented Democracy: Medicaid, Federalism, and Unequal Politics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We end the year by remembering our favorite authors, books, and some of the titles. There were so many great books written this year that we had the fun of reading and talking to a few of the authors. Weve both been doing a lot of grading, so left out as many great books as we mentioned. Please do share your favorites on Twitter/Facebook with #poliscibooks2017. Here are several of the books we mentioned in this weeks podcast: * Josh Chafetz’s Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers * Catherine Zuckert’s Machiavelli’s Politics * Brittany Cooper’s Beyond Respectability: The Intellectual Thought of Race Women * Brian Harrison and Melissa Michelson’s Listen We Need to Talk * David Kinder and Nathan Kalmoe’s Neither Liberal nor Conservative * Anna Law’s The Immigration Battle in American Courts * Alex Hertel-Fernandez’s Politics at Work * David Hopkins’s Red Fighting Blue * Jamila Michener’s Fragmented Democracy: Medicaid, Federalism, and Unequal Politics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate's role in confirmation, or Congress's power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate’s role in confirmation, or Congress’s power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate’s role in confirmation, or Congress’s power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate’s role in confirmation, or Congress’s power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate’s role in confirmation, or Congress’s power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Josh Chafetz‘s new book, Congress’s Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers (Yale University Press, 2017), examines Congress as a branch and the powers of the legislature within the constitutional system. This book approaches the Legislative branch historically, constitutionally, politically, and structurally through the separation of powers. Chafetz situates Congress as one of three political branches of government, each deriving power from the public, the constitution, formal responsibilities (like the Senate’s role in confirmation, or Congress’s power of the purse), and also informal capacities. In analyzing Congress, Chafetz makes use of the schematic framework of hard and soft power, often used by scholars to analyze international relations, contextualizing the kinds of powers that Congress has and how those powers have been used over the history of the branch and continue to be used. Chafetz explains his thesis in regard to the separation of powers theories as a “multiplicity based” understanding of the claims made to authority not only by Congress, but also by the Executive and Judicial branches, noting that there are multiple and overlapping claims to authority. The book will be of interest to a range of scholars and readers, since Chafetz integrates American political development, constitutional history, contemporary American politics, and the complexity of the development of British legislative authority that preceded and contributed to the American constitutional system. This is an accessible, complex, and fascinating book about American politics, the constitutional system, and, especially legislative authority within the system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this era of polarization in politics, how much power does Congress have compared to the President and the courts? Is the Republican Congress a meaningful check on President Trump? How well does Congress do at policing ethical lapses of its own members? On Episode 17 of the ELB Podcast, we talk with Josh Chafetz, Cornell Law School professor and author of the new book, Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers.

In this Commentary, Josh Chafetz responds to Paul M. Thompson's criticisms of his proposal for a Congressional ethics oversight body. Chafetz argues that Thompson's position relies on the inapplicable paradigm of criminal law as a model for ethics enforcement. Instead, Chafetz claims, "Congressional ethics is not simply about punishing rulebreakers; rather, it aims to promote public trust in Congress and its members." Under this framework, "it is clear not only that our current system is in shambles, but also that the creation of Congressional Commissioners would be a useful corrective."

In this Commentary, Paul M. Thompson argues that Josh Chafetz's proposal for a Congressional ethics oversight board is unnecessary. Contrary to Chafetz, Thompson argues that recent ethics scandals are signs that a system that is functioning well.