Joe Wolverton

2 weeks ago | thenewamerican.com | Joe Wolverton

In yet another blow to the American constitutional order, Stephen Miller — the ever-earnest architect of executive tyranny in immigration policy — has now publicly pondered suspending the writ of habeas corpus for illegal aliens. His proposal amounts to nothing less than a direct assault on one of the oldest and most sacred protections of liberty known to man. It is, in fact, the juridical equivalent of targeting the keystone of the arch.

4 weeks ago | thenewamerican.com | Joe Wolverton

For far too long, the American legal and political landscape has been distorted by a fundamental misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment: that merely being born on U.S. soil makes one a citizen. This misconception contradicts the original intent of the amendment’s framers. Furthermore, it undermines the foundational principle that citizenship arises from allegiance, not geographic happenstance. On May 15, the Supreme Court will take up three cases, consolidated under the name Trump v. CASA.

1 month ago | thenewamerican.com | Joe Wolverton

When discussing the intellectual influences on the Founding Fathers of the United States, one typically hears names such as Locke, Montesquieu, and Blackstone. However, one influential thinker often overlooked is Niccolò Machiavelli. Far from being merely the author of The Prince, a treatise often associated with ruthless political maneuvering, Machiavelli also penned Discourses on Livy, a profound examination of republican government and civic virtue.

1 month ago | thenewamerican.com | Joe Wolverton

The Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2025 is being promoted as a pro-Second Amendment measure, but a closer examination reveals a starkly different reality. Despite its seemingly protective title, the bill contains numerous provisions that undermine the fundamental right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

1 month ago | thenewamerican.com | Joe Wolverton

In 1818, the people of Connecticut were promised a “limited” convention — one that would deal narrowly and exclusively with two supposedly urgent reforms: to secure a clearer separation of powers and to restore religious liberty. That was the bait. The switch? A brand-new constitution and an entirely new form of government.