Copyright © 2015 Bert N. Langford (Images may be subject to copyright. Please send feedback)
Welcome to Our Generation USA!

Democracy in The United States
(as represented by the United States Constitution)
is a representative form of Democracy consisting of the Federal Government (including the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches), along with the federation of 50 state governments (including local governments).

See also "Politics" for a better understanding of the Election process.
See also "Donald Trump" regarding his impact on Politics
​

Democracy Pictured: Great Seal of the United States Federal Government
Democracy, or democratic government, is "a system of government in which all the people of a state or polity ... are involved in making decisions about its affairs, typically by voting to elect representatives to a parliament or similar assembly", as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary.

Democracy is further defined as (a:) "government by the people; especially : rule of the majority (b:) "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections."

According to political scientist Larry Diamond, it consists of four key elements: (a) A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections; (b) The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life; (c) Protection of the human rights of all citizens, and (d) A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens.
​
Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is either held by an individual, as in an absolute monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals, as in an oligarchy. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Democracy:







Forms of Democracy
YouTube Video: Ronald Reagan - Strength of Democracy "believe in our capacity to perform great deeds"
Pictured Below: The United States of America is a Democracy

Types of democracy refers to kinds of governments or social structures which allow people to participate equally, either directly or indirectly.

Direct Democracies:

A direct democracy or pure democracy is a type of democracy where the people govern directly. It requires wide participation of citizens in politics. Athenian democracy or classical democracy refers to a direct democracy developed in ancient times in the Greek city-state of Athens.

A popular democracy is a type of direct democracy based on referendums and other devices of empowerment and concretization of popular will.

An industrial democracy is an arrangement which involves workers making decisions, sharing responsibility and authority in the workplace (see also workplace)

Representative Democracies:
​
A representative democracy is an indirect democracy where sovereignty is held by the people's representatives.
Types of representative democracy include:
​
  • Electoral democracy – type of representative democracy based on election, on electoral vote, as modern occidental or liberal democracies.
  • Dominant-party system – democratic party system where only one political party can realistically become the government, by itself or in a coalition government.
  • Parliamentary democracy – democratic system of government where the executive branch of a parliamentary government is typically a cabinet, and headed by a prime minister who is considered the head of government.
    • Westminster democracy – parliamentary system of government modeled after that of the United Kingdom system.
  • Presidential democracy – democratic system of government where a head of government is also head of state and leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch.
    • Jacksonian democracy – a variant of presidential democracy popularized by U.S. President Andrew Jackson which promoted the strength of the executive branch and the Presidency at the expense of Congressional power.
  • Soviet democracy or Council democracy – form of democracy where the workers of a locality elect recallable representatives into organs of power called soviets (councils.) The local soviets elect the members of regional soviets who go on to elect higher soviets.
  • Totalitarian democracy – a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

A demarchy has people randomly selected from the citizenry through sortition to either act as general governmental representatives or to make decisions in specific areas of governance (defense, environment, etc.).

A non-partisan democracy is system of representative government or organization such that universal and periodic elections (by secret ballot) take place without reference to political parties.

​An organic or authoritarian democracy is a democracy where the ruler holds a considerable amount of power, but their rule benefits the people. The term was first used by supporters of Bonapartism.

Types of Democracy based on location:

A bioregional democracy matches geopolitical divisions to natural ecological regions.

A cellular democracy, developed by Georgist libertarian economist Fred E. Foldvary, uses a multi-level bottom-up structure based on either small neighborhood governmental districts or contractual communities.

A workplace democracy refers to the application of democracy to the workplace (see also industrial democracy).

Types of Democracy based on level of freedom:

A liberal democracy is a representative democracy with protection for individual liberty and property by rule of law. In contrast, a defensive democracy limits some rights and freedoms in order to protect the institutions of the democracy.

Types of Democracy based on Religion:
​
A religious democracy is a form of government where the values of a particular religion have an effect on the laws and rules, often when most of the population is a member of the religion, such as:
Other Types of Democracy:

Types of democracy include:
  • Anticipatory democracy – relies on some degree of disciplined and usually market-informed anticipation of the future, to guide major decisions.
  • Associationalism, or Associative Democracy – emphasis on freedom via voluntary and democratically self-governing associations.
  • Adversialism, or Adversial Democracy – with an emphasis on freedom based on adversial relationships between individuals and groups as best expressed in democratic judicial systems.
  • Bourgeois democracy – Some Marxists, Communists, Socialists and Left-wing anarchists refer to liberal democracy as bourgeois democracy, alleging that ultimately politicians fight only for the rights of the bourgeoisie.
  • Consensus democracy – rule based on consensus rather than traditional majority rule.
  • Constitutional democracy – governed by a constitution.
  • Delegative democracy – a form of democratic control whereby voting power is vested in self-selected delegates, rather than elected representatives.
  • Deliberative democracy – in which authentic deliberation, not only voting, is central to legitimate decision making. It adopts elements of both consensus decision-making and majority rule.
  • Democratic centralism – organizational method where members of a political party discuss and debate matters of policy and direction and after the decision is made by majority vote, all members are expected to follow that decision in public.
  • Democratic dictatorship (also known as democratur)
  • Democratic republic – republic which has democracy through elected representatives
  • Economic democracy – theory of democracy involving people having access to subsistence, or equity in living standards.
  • Ethnic democracy – coined to describe democracy in China.
  • Grassroots democracy – emphasizes trust in small decentralized units at the municipal government level, possibly using urban secession to establish the formal legal authority to make decisions made at this local level binding.
  • Guided democracy – is a form of democratic government with increased autocracy where citizens exercise their political rights without meaningfully affecting the government's policies, motives, and goals.
  • Interactive democracy – proposed form of democracy utilizing information technology to allow citizens to propose new policies, "second" proposals and vote on the resulting laws (that are refined by Parliament) in a referendum.
  • Jeffersonian democracy – named after American statesman Thomas Jefferson, who believed in equality of political opportunity (for male citizens), and opposed to privilege, aristocracy and corruption.
  • Market democracy – another name for democratic capitalism, an economic ideology based on a tripartite arrangement of a market-based economy based predominantly on economic incentives through free markets, a democratic polity and a liberal moral-cultural system which encourages pluralism.
  • Multiparty democracy – two-party system requires voters to align themselves in large blocs, sometimes so large that they cannot agree on any overarching principles.
  • New Democracy – Maoist concept based on Mao Zedong's "Bloc of Four Classes" theory in post-revolutionary China.
  • Participatory democracy – involves more lay citizen participation in decision making and offers greater political representation than traditional representative democracy, e.g., wider control of proxies given to representatives by those who get directly involved and actually participate.
  • People's democracy – multi-class rule in which the proletariat dominates.
  • Radical democracy – type of democracy that focuses on the importance of nurturing and tolerating difference and dissent in decision-making processes.
  • Semi-direct democracy – representative democracy with instruments, elements, and/or features of direct democracy.
  • Sociocracy – democratic system of governance based on consent decision making, circle organization, and double-linked representation.

See also:







​​Government of the United States including both the Federal Government and the individual State Governments as well as their Local Governments
YouTube Video History in Five: Abraham Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation* 
​* --Courtesy of  Simon & Schuster
Pictured Below: Political system of the United States

The United States is a federal republic in which the President of the United States, United States Congress, and United States federal courts share powers reserved to the national government. At the same time, the federal government shares sovereignty with the state governments.

The executive branch is headed by the President and is formally independent of both the legislature and the judiciary. The cabinet serves as advisers to the President. They include the Vice President and heads of the executive departments.

Legislative power is vested in the two chambers of Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The judicial branch (or judiciary), composed of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, exercises judicial power (or judiciary). The judiciary's function is to interpret the United States Constitution and federal laws and regulations. This includes resolving disputes between the executive and legislative branches. The federal government's layout is explained in the Constitution.

Two political parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, have dominated American politics since the American Civil War, although there are also smaller parties like the Libertarian Party, the Green Party, and the Constitution Party.
​
There are major differences between the political system of the United States and that of most other developed democracies. These include greater power in the upper house of the legislature, a wider scope of power held by the Supreme Court, the separation of powers between the legislature and the executive, and the dominance of only two main parties.

Third parties have less political influence in the United States than in other developed country democracies; this is because of a combination of stringent historic controls. These controls take shape in the form of state and federal laws, informal media prohibitions, and winner-take-all elections, and include ballot access issues and exclusive debate rules.

This multiplicity of jurisdictions reflects the country's history. The federal government was created by the states, which as colonies were established separately and governed themselves independently of the others. Units of local government were created by the colonies to efficiently carry out various state functions. As the country expanded, it admitted new states modeled on the existing ones.

___________________________________________________________________________

The Federal Government:

​The government of the United States of America is the federal government of the republic of fifty states that constitute the United States, as well as one capital district, and several other territories.

The federal government is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, whose powers are vested by the U.S. Constitution in the Congress, the President, and the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, respectively. The powers and duties of these branches are further defined by acts of Congress, including the creation of executive departments and courts inferior to the Supreme Court.

Click on any of the following Hyperlinks for amplification: _____________________________________________

State Governments:

State governments of the United States include the governments of the original 13 states and the governments of the remaining 37 which were admitted to the United States as authorized under Article IV, Section 3, of the Constitution of the United States.

While state governments within the United States may enact their own laws and prosecute crimes pursuant thereto, they are not sovereign in the Westphalian sense in international law*. 

*-- In that latter which says that each State has sovereignty over its territory and domestic affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers, on the principle of non-interference in another State's domestic affairs, and that each State (no matter how large or small) is equal in international law. 

Additionally, the member states of the United States do not possess international legal sovereignty, meaning that they are not recognized by other sovereign States such as, for example, France, Germany or the United Kingdom, nor do they possess full interdependence sovereignty.

The idea of "dual sovereignty" or "separate sovereigns" is derived from the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, which states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Structured in accordance with state law (including state constitutions and state statutes), state governments share the same structural model as the federal system, with three branches of government--executive, legislative, and judicial.

The governments of the 13 colonies that formed the original union under the Constitution trace their history back to the royal charters which established them during the era of colonialism.

Most of the other states admitted to the union after the original 13 have been formed within territories of the United States (that is, land under the sovereignty of the federal government but not part of any state) that were organized by an act or resolution of the United States Congress, subject to the Congress' plenary powers under the territorial clause of Article IV, sec. 3, of the U.S. Constitution. Notable exceptions are Texas, California and Hawaii, which were sovereign nations before joining the union.

Click on any of the following for amplification about State Governments:

​___________________________________________________________________________
​​
Local government in the United States:

Local government in the United States refers to governmental jurisdictions below the level of the state. Most states have at least two tiers of local government: counties and municipalities.

In some states, counties are divided into townships. There are several different types of jurisdictions at the municipal level, including the city, town, borough, and village. The types and nature of these municipal entities varies from state to state.

Many rural areas and even some suburban areas of many states have no municipal government below the county level. In other places consolidated city–county jurisdictions exist, in which city and county functions are managed by a single municipal government. In some New England states, towns are the primary unit of local government and counties have no governmental function but exist in a purely perfunctory capacity (e.g. for census data).

In addition to general purpose local governments, there may be local or regional special-purpose local governments, such as school districts and districts for fire protection, sanitary sewer service, public transportation, public libraries, or water resource management. Such special purpose districts often encompass areas in multiple municipalities. As of 2012, using the Census Bureau's definition, there were 89,055 local government units in the United States.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for further amplification:







Democracy Index for all Countries
YouTube Video: Threats to democracy in the Trump era by the Brookings Institution
Pictured below: The Economist Intelligence Unit Democracy Index map for 2017. Bluer colors represent more democratic countries as reported by the company courtesy of Goemon - Own work, derived from File:BlankMap-World-Microstates.svg, CC BY-SA 4.0.

The Democracy Index is an index compiled by the UK-based company the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) that intends to measure the state of democracy in 167 countries, of which 166 are sovereign states and 165 are UN member states.

The index was first produced in 2006, with updates for 2008, 2010 and the following years since then. The index is based on 60 indicators grouped in five different categories measuring pluralism, civil liberties and political culture.

In addition to a numeric score and a ranking, the index categorises countries as one of four regime types: 
  1. full democracies, 
  2. flawed democracies, 
  3. hybrid regimes 
  4. and authoritarian regimes.

Method:

As described in the report, the democracy index is a weighted average based on the answers of 60 questions, each one with either two or three permitted alternative answers.

Most answers are "experts' assessments"; the report does not indicate what kinds of experts, nor their number, nor whether the experts are employees of the Economist Intelligence Unit or independent scholars, nor the nationalities of the experts.

Some answers are provided by public-opinion surveys from the respective countries. In the case of countries for which survey results are missing, survey results for similar countries and expert assessments are used in order to fill in gaps.

The questions are distributed in the five categories: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation, and political culture. Each answer is translated to a mark, either 0 or 1, or for the three-answer alternative questions, 0.5.

With the exceptions mentioned below, the sums are added within each category, multiplied by ten, and divided by the total number of questions within the category. There are a few modifying dependencies, which are explained much more precisely than the main rule procedures.

In a few cases, an answer yielding zero for one question voids another question; e.g., if the elections for the national legislature and head of government are not considered free (question 1), then the next question, "Are elections... fair?" is not considered, but automatically marked zero.

Likewise, there are a few questions considered so important that a low score on them yields a penalty on the total score sum for their respective categories, namely:
  1. "Whether national elections are free and fair";
  2. "The security of voters";
  3. "The influence of foreign powers on government";
  4. "The capability of the civil servants to implement policies".

The five category indices, which are listed in the report, are then averaged to find the Democracy Index for a given country. Finally, the Democracy Index, rounded to two decimals, decides the regime type classification of the country.

The report discusses other indices of democracy, as defined e.g. by Freedom House, and argues for some of the choices made by the team from the Economist Intelligence Unit. In this comparison, a higher emphasis has been put on the public opinion and attitudes, as measured by surveys, but on the other hand, economic living standard has not been weighted as one criterion of democracy (as seemingly some other investigators have done).
​
The report is widely cited in the international press as well as in peer reviewed academic journals.

Classification Definitions:

​Full democracies are nations where civil liberties and basic political freedoms are not only respected, but also reinforced by a political culture conducive to the thriving of democratic principles. These nations have a valid system of governmental checks and balances, independent judiciary whose decisions are enforced, governments that function adequately, and media that is diverse and independent. These nations have only limited problems in democratic functioning.
​
Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement). Nonetheless, these nations have significant faults in other democratic aspects, including underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.

Hybrid regimes are nations where consequential irregularities exist in elections regularly preventing them from being fair and free. These nations commonly have governments that apply pressure on political opponents, non independent judiciaries, and have widespread corruption, harassment and pressure placed on the media, anemic rule of law, and more pronounced faults than flawed democracies in the realms of underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.

Authoritarian regimes are nations where political pluralism has vanished or is extremely limited. These nations are often absolute monarchies or dictatorships, may have some conventional institutions of democracy but with meager significance, infringements and abuses of civil liberties are commonplace, elections (if they take place) are not fair and free, the media is often state-owned or controlled by groups associated with the ruling regime, the judiciary is not independent, and they are characterised by the presence of omnipresent censorship and suppression of governmental criticism.

Recent Changes:

In 2016, the United States was downgraded from a full democracy to a flawed democracy; its score, which had been experiencing a persistent downward trend, crossed the threshold from 8.05 in 2015 to 7.98 in 2016.

The report states that this was not due only to the election of Donald Trump, but was caused by other factors as well — dating back to the late 1960s — that led to his election.

The 2017 Democracy index registered the worst year for global democracy since 2010–11 in the aftermath of the global economic and financial crisis. 89 countries experienced a decline in their total score compared with 2016, more than three times as many as the countries that recorded an improvement.

Asia was the worst performing region overall, while Venezuela was downgraded from a "hybrid regime" to an "authoritarian regime" and Armenia was upgraded from an "authoritarian regime" to a "hybrid regime".

Australia (ranked 8th) and Taiwan (ranked 33rd) both legalized gay marriage in 2017.

In China, Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, further entrenched his power by writing his theoretical contribution to the Chinese Communist Party’s ideology, dubbed “Xi Jinping Thought”, into the party’s constitution.

Moldova was downgraded from a “flawed democracy” to a “hybrid regime” as a result of problematic elections. By contrast, Armenia moved from the authoritarian category to a “hybrid regime” as a result of constitutional changes that shifted power from the presidency to parliament.

Click on any of the following blue hyprlinks for more about the Democracy Index:





​

Presidents of the United States Featuring Presidents in Office Starting in 1950 and through Today, including Each President's Historical Ranking as well as Approval Ratings
YouTube Video: "Obama out:" President Barack Obama's hilarious final White House correspondents' dinner speech
​Pictured: Presidents and terms served and beginning in 1950 from Top Left to Bottom Right:
Harry S. Truman (1945-1953), Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-1961), John F. Kennedy (1961-1963), Lyndon B. Johnson, (1963-1969),
Richard M. Nixon (1969-1974), Gerald Ford (1974-1977), Jimmy Carter (1977-1981), Ronald Reagan (1981-1989),
George H. W. Bush (1989-1993), Bill Clinton (1993-2001), George W. Bush (2001-2009), and Barack Obama (2009-2017)
Not shown below: Donald Trump and Joe Biden 
The President of the United States of America (POTUS) is the elected head of state and head of government of the United States. The president leads the executive branch of the federal government and is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces.

The President of the United States is considered one of the world's most powerful people, leading the world's only contemporary superpower.

The role includes being the commander-in-chief of the world's most expensive military with the largest nuclear arsenal and leading the nation with the largest economy by real and nominal GDP. The office of the president holds significant hard and soft power both in the United States and abroad.

Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests the executive power of the United States in the president. The power includes:
  • execution of federal law,
  • alongside the responsibility of appointing federal executive, diplomatic, regulatory and judicial officers,
  • and concluding treaties with foreign powers with the advice and consent of the Senate.

The president is further empowered to grant federal pardons and reprieves, and to convene and adjourn either or both houses of Congress under extraordinary circumstances.

The president is largely responsible for dictating the legislative agenda of the party to which the president is enrolled. The president also directs the foreign and domestic policy of the United States. 

Since the founding of the United States, the power of the president and the federal government has grown substantially.

The president is indirectly elected by the people through the Electoral College to a four-year term, and is one of only two nationally elected federal officers, the other being the Vice President of the United States.

The Twenty-second Amendment, adopted in 1951, prohibits anyone from ever being elected to the presidency for a third full term. It also prohibits a person from being elected to the presidency more than once if that person previously had served as president, or acting president, for more than two years of another person's term as president.

In all, 43 individuals have served 44 presidencies (counting Cleveland's two non-consecutive terms separately) spanning 56 full four-year terms.

On January 20, 2009, Barack Obama became the 44th and current president. On November 6, 2012, he was re-elected and is currently serving the 57th term. The next presidential election is scheduled to take place on November 8, 2016; on January 20, 2017, the newly elected president will take office.

Approval Ratings by President:

In the United States, presidential job approval ratings were introduced by George Gallup in the late 1930s (probably 1937) to gauge public support for the President of the United States during his term. An approval rating is a percentage determined by a polling which indicates the percentage of respondents to an opinion poll who approve of a particular person or program.

Typically, an approval rating is given to a political figure based on responses to a poll in which a sample of people are asked whether they approve or disapprove of that particular political figure. A typical question might ask: "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as President?" 

​Like most surveys that predict public opinion, the approval rating is subjective. Many unscientific approval rating systems exist that skew popular opinion. However, the approval rating is generally accepted as a statistically valid indicator of the comparative changes in the popular US mood regarding a president.

For a historical comparison of approval ratings, click here

For further amplification about the Office of the President, click on any of the following:​​






​​
Harry S. Truman (1945-1953)
YouTube Video: President Harry S. Truman fires General Douglas MacArthur
Pictured: Truman holding newspaper that incorrectly predicted Truman's loss to Republican Thomas E. Dewey
Harry S. Truman (May 8, 1884 – December 26, 1972) was an American politician who served as the 33rd President of the United States (1945–53), coming to office on the death of Franklin Roosevelt in the last months of World War II.

He is known for launching the Marshall Plan to rebuild the economy of Western Europe, for leading the Cold War against Soviet communism through the Truman doctrine and NATO, and for engaging in a stalemate in the Korean War.

In domestic affairs, he was a moderate Democrat whose liberal proposals were a continuation of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, but the Conservative-dominated Congress blocked most of them. He used presidential authority to mandate equal treatment for blacks in the military and put civil rights on the national political agenda.

Truman served as a United States Senator from Missouri (1935–45) and briefly as Vice President (1945) before he succeeded to the presidency on April 12, 1945 upon the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Truman presided over an unexpected surge in economic prosperity as America sought readjustment after long years of depression and war. His political coalition was based on the white South, labor unions, farmers, ethnic groups, and traditional Democrats across the North. Truman rallied them to win elected in his own right in 1948.

Truman was born in Lamar, Missouri, and spent most of his youth on his family's 600-acre farm near Independence. In the last months of World War I, he served in combat in France as an artillery officer with his National Guard unit. After the war, he briefly owned a haberdashery in Kansas City, Missouri, and joined the Democratic Party and the political machine of Tom Pendergast.

Truman was first elected to public office as a county official in 1922, and then as a U.S. Senator in 1934. He gained national prominence as chairman of the Truman Committee, formed in March 1941, which exposed waste, fraud, and corruption in Federal Government wartime contracts.

Germany surrendered on Truman's birthday, just a few weeks after he assumed the presidency, but the war with Imperial Japan raged on and was expected to last at least another year. Truman approved the use of atomic weaponry to end the fighting and to spare the tens of thousands of American lives that would inevitably be lost in the planned invasion of Japan and Japanese held islands in the Pacific. Although this decision remains debated to this day, it is one of the principal factors that forced Japan's immediate and unconditional surrender.

Truman's presidency was a turning point in foreign affairs, as the United States engaged in an internationalist foreign policy and renounced isolationism. Truman helped found the United Nations in 1945, issued the Truman Doctrine in 1947 to contain Communism, and got the $13 billion Marshall Plan enacted to rebuild Western Europe.

The Soviet Union, a wartime ally, became a peacetime enemy in the Cold War. Truman oversaw the Berlin Airlift of 1948 and the creation of NATO in 1949. He was unable to stop Communists from taking over China.

When communist North Korea invaded South Korea in 1950, he sent U.S. troops and gained UN approval for the Korean War. After initial successes in Korea, however, the UN forces were thrown back by Chinese intervention, and the conflict was stalemated throughout the final years of Truman's presidency.

On domestic issues, bills endorsed by Truman often faced opposition from a conservative Congress dominated by the Southern legislators, but his administration was able to successfully guide the American economy through the post-war economic challenges.

Truman maintained that civil rights were a moral priority, and in 1948 submitted the first comprehensive civil rights legislation and issued Executive Orders to start racial integration in the military and federal agencies.

Allegations were raised of corruption in the Truman administration, linked to certain cabinet members and senior White House staff, and this became a central campaign issue in the 1952 presidential election and helped account for the win by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In a surprise comparable to the 2016 election, he won reelection in 1948 and his success has often been invoked by later underdogs. Popular and scholarly assessments of Truman's presidency initially were unfavorable but became more positive since the 1960s.

Click here for further amplification about Harry S. Truman.







​
Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-1961)
YouTube Video Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex.
Pictured: LEFT: as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force*; RIGHT: as President of the United States.
* -- Eisenhower's command led the successful coalition of military forces responsible for winning World War II on two fronts: Europe against Nazi Germany, and Japan.
The presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower, from 1953 to 1961, was a Republican interlude during the Fifth Party System, following 20 years of Democratic control of the White House.

It was a period of peace and prosperity, and interparty cooperation, even as the world was polarized by the Cold War.

His main legacy was the Interstate Highway System. He sent the Army to Arkansas to enforce court orders regarding racial integration, created NASA, and made the space race against the Soviet Union a high priority.

He emphasized advanced technology to keep down the expense of a large military manpower. He supported the conservative fiscal and taxation policies of the Taft Republicans.

Ike, as he was popularly known, expanded the Social Security program but otherwise did not try to change the surviving "New Deal" welfare programs. A self-described "progressive conservative," President Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex. He is consistently ranked by scholars and political historians as one of the ten greatest American presidents.

Click for further amplification about Dwight D. Eisenhower.







​
​John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)Pictured: President John F. Kennedy LEFT: Official Portrait; RIGHT: In motorcade in Ireland
John Fitzgerald "Jack" Kennedy (May 29, 1917 – November 22, 1963), commonly referred to by his initials JFK, was an American politician who served as the 35th President of the United States from January 1961 until his assassination in November 1963.

The Cuban Missile Crisis, the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the establishment of the Peace Corps, developments in the Space Race, the building of the Berlin Wall, the Trade Expansion Act to lower tariffs, and the Civil Rights Movement all took place during his presidency.

A member of the Democratic Party, his New Frontier domestic program was largely enacted as a memorial to him after his death. Kennedy also established the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1963.

Kennedy's time in office was marked by high tensions with Communist states. He increased the number of American military advisers in South Vietnam by a factor of 18 over Eisenhower.

In Cuba, a failed attempt was made at the Bay of Pigs to overthrow the country's dictator Fidel Castro in April 1961. He subsequently rejected plans by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to orchestrate false-flag attacks on American soil in order to gain public approval for a war against Cuba.

In October 1962, it was discovered Soviet ballistic missiles had been deployed in Cuba; the resulting period of unease, termed the Cuban Missile Crisis, is seen by many historians as the closest the human race has ever come to nuclear war between nuclear armed belligerents.

After military service in the United States Naval Reserve in World War II, Kennedy represented Massachusetts's 11th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1947 to 1953.

He was elected subsequently to the U.S. Senate and served as the junior Senator from Massachusetts from 1953 until 1960. Kennedy defeated Vice President, and Republican candidate, Richard Nixon in the 1960 U.S. Presidential Election. At age 43, he became the youngest elected president and the second-youngest president (after Theodore Roosevelt, who was 42 when he became president after the assassination of William McKinley).

Kennedy was also the first person born in the 20th century to serve as president. To date, Kennedy has been the only Roman Catholic president and the only president to have won a Pulitzer Prize (for his biography Profiles in Courage).

Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested that afternoon and determined to have fired shots that hit the President from a sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository. Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby fatally shot Oswald two days later in a jail corridor.

The FBI and the Warren Commission officially concluded that Oswald was the lone assassin, but its report was sharply criticized. The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) agreed that Oswald fired the shots that killed the president, but also concluded that Kennedy was likely assassinated as the result of a conspiracy.

The majority of Americans alive at the time of the assassination (52% to 29%), and continuing through 2013 (61% to 30%), believed that there was a conspiracy and that Oswald was not the only shooter.

Since the 1960s, information concerning Kennedy's private life has come to light, including his health problems and allegations of infidelity. Kennedy continues to rank highly in historians' polls of U.S. presidents and with the general public. His average approval rating of 70% is the highest of any president in Gallup's history of systematically measuring job approval.

Click here for further amplification about John F. Kennedy.







​
Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)
YouTube Video: President Lyndon B. Johnson Announcing "The Great Society"
Lyndon Baines Johnson (August 27, 1908 – January 22, 1973), often referred to as LBJ, was an American politician who served as the 36th President of the United States from 1963 to 1969, assuming the office after serving as the 37th Vice President of the United States under President John F. Kennedy, from 1961 to 1963.

Johnson was a Democrat from Texas, who served as a United States Representative from 1937 to 1949 and as a United States Senator from 1949 to 1961. He spent six years as Senate Majority Leader, two as Senate Minority Leader, and two as Senate Majority Whip.

Johnson ran for the Democratic nomination in the 1960 presidential election. Although unsuccessful, he was chosen by Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts to be his running mate. They went on to win a close election over Richard Nixon and Henry Cabot Lodge. Johnson was sworn in as Vice President on January 20, 1961.

Two years and ten months later, on November 22, 1963, Johnson succeeded Kennedy as President following the latter's assassination. He ran for a full term in the 1964 election, winning by a landslide over Republican opponent Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. He is one of only four people who have served as President, Vice President, Senator, and Representative.

Johnson was renowned for his domineering, sometimes abrasive, personality and the "Johnson treatment"—his aggressive coercion of powerful politicians to advance legislation.
Johnson designed the "Great Society" legislation upholding civil rights, public broadcasting, Medicare, Medicaid, aid to education, the arts, urban and rural development, public services, and his "War on Poverty".

​Assisted in part by a growing economy, the War on Poverty helped millions of Americans rise above the poverty line during Johnson's presidency. Civil rights bills signed by Johnson banned racial discrimination in public facilities, interstate commerce, the workplace, and housing; and the Voting Rights Act banned certain requirements in southern states used to disenfranchise African Americans.

With the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the country's immigration system was reformed and all racial origin quotas were removed (replaced by national origin quotas).

Johnson escalated American involvement in the Vietnam War. In 1964, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted Johnson the power to use military force in Southeast Asia without having to ask for an official declaration of war.

The number of American military personnel in Vietnam increased dramatically, from 16,000 advisors in non-combat roles in 1963, to 550,000 in early 1968, many in combat roles. American casualties soared and the peace process bogged down. Growing unease with the war stimulated a large, angry antiwar movement based especially on university campuses in the U.S. and abroad.

Johnson faced further troubles when summer riots broke out in most major cities after 1965, and crime rates soared, as his opponents raised demands for "law and order" policies. While he began his presidency with widespread approval, support for Johnson declined as the public became upset with both the war and the growing violence at home.

In 1968, the Democratic Party factionalized as antiwar elements denounced Johnson; he ended his bid for renomination after a disappointing finish in the New Hampshire primary.

Republican Richard Nixon was elected to succeed him, as the New Deal coalition that had dominated presidential politics for 36 years collapsed. After he left office in January 1969, Johnson returned to his Texas ranch where he died of a heart attack at age 64 on January 22, 1973.

Historians argue that Johnson's presidency marked the peak of modern liberalism in the United States after the New Deal era. Johnson is ranked favorably by some historians because of his domestic policies and the passage of many major laws, affecting civil rights, gun control, wilderness preservation, and Social Security.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for further amplification: ​






​
​Richard M. Nixon (1969-1973)
YouTube Video: Richard M. Nixon Compilation
Richard Milhous Nixon (January 9, 1913 – April 22, 1994) was an American politician who served as the 37th President of the United States from 1969 until 1974, when he became the only U.S. president to resign from office.

He had previously served as a U.S. Representative and Senator from California and as the 36th Vice President of the United States from 1953 to 1961 under the Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Nixon was born in Yorba Linda, California. After completing his undergraduate studies at Whittier College, he graduated from Duke University School of Law in 1937 and returned to California to practice law. He and his wife Pat moved to Washington in 1942 to work for the federal government.

He subsequently served on active duty in the U.S. Navy Reserve during World War II. Nixon was elected to the House of Representatives in 1946 and to the Senate in 1950. His pursuit of the Hiss Case established his reputation as a leading anti-communist, and elevated him to national prominence.

He was the running mate of Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Republican Party presidential nominee in the 1952 election. Nixon served for eight years as vice president. He waged an unsuccessful presidential campaign in 1960, narrowly losing to John F. Kennedy, and lost a race for Governor of California to Pat Brown in 1962.

In 1968, he ran for the presidency again and was elected by defeating Incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey.

Nixon ended American involvement in the war in Vietnam in 1973 and brought the American POWs home, and ended the military draft. 

Nixon's visit to the People's Republic of China in 1972 opened diplomatic relations between the two nations, and he initiated détente and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union the same year.

His administration generally transferred power from Washington to the states. He imposed wage and price controls for a period of ninety days, enforced desegregation of Southern schools and established the Environmental Protection Agency. Nixon also presided over the Apollo 11 moon landing, which signaled the end of the moon race. He was reelected in one of the largest electoral landslides in U.S. history in 1972, when he defeated George McGovern.

The year 1973 saw an Arab oil embargo, gasoline rationing, and a continuing series of revelations about the Watergate scandal. The scandal escalated, costing Nixon much of his political support, and on August 9, 1974, he resigned in the face of almost certain impeachment and removal from office.

After his resignation, he was issued a pardon by his successor, Gerald Ford.

In retirement, Nixon's work writing several books and undertaking of many foreign trips helped to rehabilitate his image. He suffered a debilitating stroke on April 18, 1994, and died four days later at the age of 81.

Click here for further amplification.







​
​Gerald Ford (1973-1977)
YouTube Video: President Gerald Ford - Remarks in Helsinki (1975)*
* -- Ford's address to Brezhnev and other European leaders at the controversial Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. After the particularly difficult conference, Ford speaks forcefully of the "deep devotion of the American people and their government to human rights and fundamental freedoms."
Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. (born Leslie Lynch King, Jr.; July 14, 1913 – December 26, 2006) was an American politician who served as the 38th President of the United States from 1974 to 1977.

Prior to this he was the 40th Vice President of the United States, serving from 1973 until President Richard Nixon's resignation in 1974. He was the first person appointed to the vice presidency under the terms of the 25th Amendment, following the resignation of Vice President Spiro Agnew on October 10, 1973.

Becoming president upon Richard Nixon's departure on August 9, 1974, he claimed the distinction as the first and to date only person to have served as both Vice President and President of the United States without being elected to either office.

Before ascending to the vice presidency, Ford served 25 years as U.S. Representative from Michigan's 5th congressional district, the final nine of them as the House Minority Leader.

As President, Ford signed the Helsinki Accords, marking a move toward détente in the Cold War.

With the conquest of South Vietnam by North Vietnam nine months into his presidency, U.S. involvement in Vietnam essentially ended.

Domestically, Ford presided over the worst economy in the four decades since the Great Depression, with growing inflation and a recession during his tenure.

One of his more controversial acts was to grant a presidential pardon to President Richard Nixon for his role in the Watergate scandal.

During Ford's presidency, foreign policy was characterized in procedural terms by the increased role Congress began to play, and by the corresponding curb on the powers of the President. In the Republican presidential primary campaign of 1976, Ford defeated then-former California Governor Ronald Reagan for the Republican nomination. He narrowly lost the presidential election to the Democratic challenger, then-former Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter, on November 2.

Following his years as President, Ford remained active in the Republican Party. After experiencing health problems, he died in his home on December 26, 2006. Ford lived longer than any other U.S. president, 93 years and 165 days, while his 895-day presidency remains the shortest term of all presidents who did not die in office.

Click here for further amplification about Gerald Ford.
​






​
Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
YouTube Video: Jimmy Carter - Mini Biography
James Earl "Jimmy" Carter Jr. (born October 1, 1924) is an American politician who served as the 39th President of the United States from 1977 to 1981. In 2002, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work with the Carter Center.

Carter, a Democrat raised in rural Georgia, was a peanut farmer who served two terms as a Georgia State Senator, from 1963 to 1967, and one as the Governor of Georgia, from 1971 to 1975. He was elected President in 1976, defeating incumbent President Gerald Ford in a relatively close election; the Electoral College margin of 57 votes was the closest at that time since 1916.

On his second day in office, Carter pardoned all evaders of the Vietnam War drafts.

During Carter's term as President, two new cabinet-level departments, the Department of Energy and the Department of Education were established. He established a national energy policy that included conservation, price control, and new technology.

In foreign affairs, Carter pursued the Camp David Accords, the Panama Canal Treaties, the second round of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT II), and the return of the Panama Canal Zone to Panama.

On the economic front he confronted persistent "stagflation", a combination of high inflation, high unemployment and slow growth. The end of his presidential tenure was marked by the 1979–1981 Iran hostage crisis, the 1979 energy crisis, the Three Mile Island nuclear accident, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

In response to the Soviet move he ended détente, escalated the Cold War, and led the international boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow.

By 1980, Carter's popularity had eroded such that, running for re-election that year, he was challenged by Senator Ted Kennedy in the Democratic Party's primaries for the presidential nomination, marking the most recent Democratic primary in which an incumbent faced serious opposition.

Carter won the 1980 primary with 51.13% of the vote (all incumbent candidates since have won at least 72.8% of their party's primary votes) but lost the general election in an electoral landslide to Republican nominee Ronald Reagan, who won 44 of 50 states.

His presidency has drawn medium-low responses from historians, with many considering him to have brought greater accomplishment with his post-presidency work. He set up the Carter Center in 1982 as his base for advancing human rights. He has also traveled extensively to conduct peace negotiations, observe elections, and advance disease prevention and eradication in developing nations.

Additionally, Carter is a key figure in the Habitat for Humanity project. He has been the longest-retired president in American history since September 2012, when he surpassed Herbert Hoover, he is also the first president to witness the 40th anniversary of his election.

Regarding current political views, he has criticized some of Israel's actions and policies in regards to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and has advocated for a two-state solution. He has vigorously opposed the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC to strike down McCain-Feingold limits on campaign spending by corporations and unions, saying that the U.S. is "no longer a functioning democracy" and now has a system of "unlimited political bribery."

Click here for further amplification about Jimmy Carter.
​






​
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
YouTube Video: Ronald Reagan: "Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall!"
Pictured: Ronald Reagan as LEFT: Actor; RIGHT: President of the United States
Ronald Wilson Reagan (February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004) was an American politician and actor who was the 40th President of the United States, from 1981 to 1989. Before his presidency, he was the 33rd Governor of California, from 1967 to 1975, after a career as a Hollywood actor and union leader.

Raised in a poor family in small towns of northern Illinois, Ronald Reagan graduated from Eureka College in 1932 and worked as a sports announcer on several regional radio stations.

After moving to Hollywood in 1937, he became an actor and starred in a few major productions. Reagan was twice elected President of the Screen Actors Guild, the labor union for actors, where he worked to root out Communist influence. In the 1950s, he moved into television and was a motivational speaker at General Electric factories.

Having been a lifelong Democrat, his views changed. He became a conservative and in 1962 switched to the Republican Party. In 1964, Reagan's speech, "A Time for Choosing", in support of Barry Goldwater's floundering presidential campaign, earned him national attention as a new conservative spokesman. Building a network of supporters, he was elected Governor of California in 1966.

As governor, Reagan raised taxes, turned a state budget deficit to a surplus, challenged the protesters at the University of California, ordered National Guard troops in during a period of protest movements in 1969, and was re-elected in 1970.

He twice ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for the U.S. presidency in 1968 and 1976; four years later, he easily won the nomination outright, going on to be elected the second oldest President, defeating incumbent Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Entering the presidency in 1981, Reagan implemented sweeping new political and economic initiatives. His supply-side economic policies, dubbed "Reaganomics", advocated tax rate reduction to spur economic growth, control of the money supply to curb inflation, economic deregulation, and reduction in government spending.

In his first term he survived an assassination attempt, spurred the War on Drugs, and fought public sector labor. Over his two terms, his economic policies saw a reduction of inflation from 12.5% to 4.4%, and an average annual growth of real GDP of 3.4%; while Reagan did enact cuts in domestic discretionary spending, increased military spending contributed to increased federal outlays overall, even after adjustment for inflation.

During his re-election bid, Reagan campaigned on the notion that it was "Morning in America", winning a landslide in 1984 with the largest electoral college victory in history. Foreign affairs dominated his second term, including ending of the Cold War, the bombing of Libya, and the Iran–Contra affair.

Publicly describing the Soviet Union as an "evil empire", he transitioned Cold War policy from détente to rollback, by escalating an arms race with the USSR while engaging in talks with Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, which culminated in the INF Treaty, shrinking both countries' nuclear arsenals. During his famous speech at the Brandenburg Gate, President Reagan challenged Gorbachev to "tear down this wall!". Five months after the end of his term, the Berlin Wall fell, and on December 26, 1991, nearly three years after he left office, the Soviet Union collapsed.

Leaving office in 1989, Reagan held an approval rating of sixty-eight percent, matching those of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and later Bill Clinton, as the highest ratings for departing presidents in the modern era.

He was the first president since Dwight D. Eisenhower to serve two full terms, after a succession of five prior presidents failed to do so.

While having planned an active post-presidency, in 1994 Reagan disclosed his diagnosis with Alzheimer's disease earlier that year, appearing publicly for the last time at the funeral of Richard Nixon; he died ten years later in 2004 at the age of 93.

An icon among Republicans, he is viewed favorably in historian rankings of U.S. presidents, and his tenure constituted a realignment toward conservative policies in the United States.

Click on any of the following for further amplification:









​George H.W. Bush (1989-1993)
YouTube Video: President George H. W. Bush Announces War Against Iraq (January 16 1991)
George Herbert Walker Bush (born June 12, 1924) is an American politician who was the 41st President of the United States from 1989 to 1993 and the 43rd Vice President of the United States from 1981 to 1989.

A member of the U.S. Republican Party, he was previously a congressman, ambassador, and Director of Central Intelligence.

Since 2000, Bush is often referred to as "George H. W. Bush", "Bush 41", "Bush the Elder", or "George Bush Sr." to distinguish him from his eldest son, George W. Bush, who became the 43rd President of the United States. Prior to his son's presidency, he was simply referred to as George Bush or President Bush.

Bush was born in Milton, Massachusetts, to Prescott Bush and Dorothy Walker Bush. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, Bush postponed college, enlisted in the U.S. Navy on his 18th birthday, and became the youngest aviator in the U.S. Navy at the time. He served until the end of the war, then attended Yale University. Graduating in 1948, he moved his family to West Texas and entered the oil business, becoming a millionaire by the age of 40.

Bush became involved in politics soon after founding his own oil company, serving as a member of the House of Representatives and Director of Central Intelligence, among other positions. He failed to win the Republican nomination for President in 1980, but was chosen as a running mate by party nominee Ronald Reagan, and the two were elected. During his tenure, Bush headed administration task forces on deregulation and fighting the "War on Drugs".

In 1988, Bush ran a successful campaign to succeed Reagan as President, defeating Democratic opponent Michael Dukakis. 

Foreign policy drove the Bush presidency: military operations were conducted in Panama and the Persian Gulf; the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, and the Soviet Union dissolved two years later.

Domestically, Bush reneged on a 1988 campaign promise and, after a struggle with Congress, signed an increase in taxes that Congress had passed. In the wake of a weak recovery from an economic recession, along with continuing budget deficits and the controversy over his appointment of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, he lost the 1992 presidential election to Democrat Bill Clinton.

Bush left office in 1993. His presidential library was dedicated in 1997, and he has been active—often alongside Bill Clinton—in various humanitarian activities.

Besides being the 43rd president (2001–09), his son George also served as the 46th Governor of Texas (1995–2000) and is one of only two presidents—the other being John Quincy Adams—to be the son of a former president.

His second son, Jeb Bush, served as the 43rd Governor of Florida (1999–2007) and made an unsuccessful run for the Republican Party nomination for the office in 2016. In September 2016, Bush made headlines by joining a group of Republicans who opposed the GOP nominee for President, Donald Trump by announcing his intent to vote for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Click here for more about George H. W. Bush.







​
Bill Clinton (1993-2001)
YouTube Video: President Clinton’s Balanced Budget Announcement
William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton (born William Jefferson Blythe III; August 19, 1946) is an American politician who served as the 42nd President of the United States from 1993 to 2001. Clinton was Governor of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981 and 1983 to 1992, and Arkansas Attorney General from 1977 to 1979. A member of the Democratic Party, ideologically Clinton was a New Democrat, and many of his policies reflected a centrist "Third Way" political philosophy.

Clinton was born and raised in Arkansas and is an alumnus of Georgetown University, where he was a member of Kappa Kappa Psi and the Phi Beta Kappa Society and earned a Rhodes Scholarship to attend the University of Oxford.

Clinton is married to Hillary Clinton, who served as United States Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, who was a Senator from New York from 2001 to 2009, and who was the Democratic nominee for President of the United States in 2016.

Both Clintons earned law degrees from Yale Law School, where they met and began dating. As Governor of Arkansas, Clinton overhauled the state's education system, and served as chairman of the National Governors Association.

Clinton was elected President in 1992, defeating incumbent George H. W. Bush. At age 46, Clinton was the third-youngest president, and the first from the Baby Boomer generation. Clinton presided over the longest period of peacetime economic expansion in American history, and signed into law the North American Free Trade Agreement. After failing to pass national health care reform, the Democratic House was ousted when the Republican Party won control of the Congress in 1994, for the first time in 40 years.

Two years later, in 1996, Clinton became the first Democrat since Franklin D. Roosevelt to be elected to a second term. Clinton passed welfare reform and the State Children's Health Insurance Program, providing health coverage for millions of children.

In 1998, Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives for perjury before a grand jury and obstruction of justice during a lawsuit against him, both related to a scandal involving White House (and later Department of Defense) employee Monica Lewinsky. Clinton was acquitted by the U.S. Senate in 1999, and served his complete term of office.

The Congressional Budget Office reported a budget surplus between the years 1998 and 2000, the last three years of Clinton's presidency. In foreign policy, Clinton ordered U.S. military intervention in the Bosnia and Kosovo wars, signed the Iraq Liberation Act in opposition to Saddam Hussein, and participated in the 2000 Camp David Summit to advance the Israeli–Palestinian peace process.

Clinton left office with the highest end-of-office approval rating of any U.S. President since World War II.

Since then, Clinton has been involved in public speaking and humanitarian work. Clinton created the William J. Clinton Foundation to address international causes, such as the prevention of AIDS and global warming.

In 2004, Clinton published his autobiography My Life. Clinton has remained active in politics by campaigning for Democratic candidates, including his wife's campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 and 2016, and Barack Obama's presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.

In 2009, Clinton was named the United Nations Special Envoy to Haiti, and after the 2010 Haiti earthquake, Clinton teamed with George W. Bush to form the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund. Since leaving office, Clinton has been rated highly in public opinion polls of U.S. Presidents.

Click here for further amplification about Bill Clinton.​







​
​George W. Bush (2001-2009)
YouTube Video: The legacy of President George W. Bush*
*-​Presidential Historian Douglas Brinkley recounts the highs and lows of the presidency of George W. Bush (CNN)
​The presidency of George W. Bush began on January 20, 2001 at noon Eastern Standard Time, when George W. Bush was inaugurated as the 43rd President of the United States, and ended on January 20, 2009. The oldest son of former president George H. W. Bush, he was elected president in 2000, and became the second U.S. president whose father had held the same office, succeeding John Quincy Adams.

After two recounts, then-Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore filed a lawsuit for a third. The Supreme Court's highly controversial decision in Bush v. Gore resolved the dispute. The Florida Secretary of State certified Bush as the winner of Florida. The state's 25 electoral votes gave Bush 271 electoral votes, enough to defeat Gore. Bush was re-elected in 2004 defeating Democratic candidate and United States Senator from Massachusetts John Kerry.

​As president, Bush pushed through a $1.3 trillion tax cut program and the No Child Left Behind Act, and also pushed for socially conservative efforts, such as the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and faith-based welfare initiatives.

Nearly 8 million people immigrated to the United States in 2000 –2005; nearly half entered illegally. During his two terms, the United States lost over six million manufacturing jobs, about one third of the total at the end of the Clinton Administration.

After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Bush declared a global War on Terrorism and, in October 2001, ordered an invasion of Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban, destroy Al-Qaeda, and to capture Osama bin Laden. In March 2003, Bush received a mandate from the U.S. Congress to lead an invasion of Iraq, asserting that Iraq was in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1441.

Bush also initiated an AIDS program that committed $15 billion to combat AIDS over five years. His record as a humanitarian included helping enroll as many as 29 million of Africa's poorest children in schools.

On his second full day in office, Bush reinstated the Mexico City Policy; this policy required any non-governmental organization receiving US Government funding to refrain from performing or promoting abortion services in other countries.

Running as a self-styled "war president" in the midst of the Iraq War, Bush won re-election in 2004, as his campaign against Senator John Kerry was successful despite controversy over Bush's prosecution of the Iraq War and his handling of the economy.

His second term was highlighted by several free trade agreements, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 alongside a strong push for offshore and domestic drilling, the nominations of Supreme Court Justices John G. Roberts and Samuel Alito, a push for Social Security and immigration reform, his administration's response to Hurricane Katrina, a surge of troops in Iraq, which was followed by a drop in violence, and several different economic initiatives aimed at preventing a banking system collapse, stopping foreclosures, and stimulating the economy during the recession.

The approval ratings of George W. Bush have, at different points in time, run the gamut from high to all-time record low. Bush began his presidency with ratings near 50%. In the time of national crisis following the September 11 attacks, polls showed approval ratings of greater than 85%, peaking in one October 2001 poll at 92%, and a steady 80–90% approval for about four months after the attacks.

Afterward, his ratings steadily declined as the economy suffered and the Iraq War initiated by his administration continued. By early 2006, his average rating was averaging below 40%, and in July 2008, a poll indicated a near all-time low of 22%. Upon leaving office the final poll recorded his approval rating as 19%, a record low for any U.S. President.

Click here for further amplification.







​
Barack Obama (2009-2017)
YouTube Video: Video of President Obama on the Death of Osama Bin Laden
​The presidency of Barack Obama began at noon EST on January 20, 2009, when Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States.

Obama, a Democrat, was a United States Senator from Illinois at the time of his victory over Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. Obama is the first African American president, the first non-white president, and the first to have been born in Hawaii. His running mate, Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, took office as Vice President on the same day.

Obama's first-term actions addressed the global financial crisis and included a major stimulus package, a partial extension of the Bush tax cuts, legislation to reform health care, a major financial regulation reform bill, and the end of a major US military presence in Iraq.

Obama also appointed Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, the latter of whom became the first Hispanic American on the Supreme Court. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress until Republicans won a majority in the House of Representatives in the 2010 elections. Following the elections, Obama and Congressional Republicans engaged in a protracted stand-off over government spending levels and the debt ceiling.

Obama won election to a second term in 2012, making him the seventeenth person to win two presidential elections. In his second term, Obama took steps to combat climate change, signing a major international climate agreement and an executive order to limit carbon emissions.

Obama also presided over the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and other legislation passed in his first term, and he negotiated rapprochements with Iran and Cuba.

The number of American soldiers in Afghanistan fell dramatically during Obama's second term, though the United States currently plans to leave soldiers in Afghanistan until at least 2017.

Republicans took control of the Senate after the 2014 elections, and Obama continued to grapple with Congressional Republicans over government spending, immigration, judicial nominations, and other issues.

Obama's presidency is scheduled to end with the inauguration of Republican President-elect Donald Trump on January 20, 2017.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for further amplification:









Standing Rules of the United States Senate, including the Filibuster Pictured below: "Mitch McConnell Rejects President Trump's Suggestion to End Filibuster" (Time magazine)
​The Standing Rules of the Senate are the parliamentary procedures adopted by the United States Senate that govern its procedure. The Senate's power to establish rules derives from Article One, Section 5 of the United States Constitution: "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings..."

There are currently forty-four rules, with the latest revision having been adopted on January 24, 2013. (The Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006 lobbying reform bill introduced a 44th rule on earmarks). The stricter rules are often waived by unanimous consent.

The Constitution provides that a majority of the Senate constitutes a quorum to do business. Under the rules and customs of the Senate, a quorum is always assumed to be present unless a quorum call explicitly demonstrates otherwise.

Any senator may request a quorum call by "suggesting the absence of a quorum"; a clerk then calls the roll of the Senate and notes which members are present. In practice, senators almost always request quorum calls not to establish the presence of a quorum, but to temporarily delay proceedings without having to adjourn the session.

Such a delay may serve one of many purposes; often, it allows Senate leaders to negotiate compromises off the floor or to allow senators time to come to the Senate floor to make speeches without having to constantly be present in the chamber while waiting for the opportunity. Once the need for a delay has ended, any senator may request unanimous consent to rescind the quorum call.

During debates, senators may speak only if called upon by the presiding officer. The presiding officer is, however, required to recognize the first senator who rises to speak. Thus, the presiding officer has little control over the course of debate. Customarily, the majority leader and minority leader are accorded priority during debates, even if another senator rises first.

All speeches must be addressed to the presiding officer, using the words "Mr. President" or "Madam President." Only the presiding officer may be directly addressed in speeches; other members must be referred to in the third person. In most cases, senators refer to each other not by name, but by state, using forms such as "the senior senator from Virginia" or "the junior senator from California."

There are very few restrictions on the content of speeches; there is no requirement that speeches be germane to the matter before the Senate.

The Standing Rules of the United States Senate provide that no senator may make more than two speeches on a motion or bill on the same legislative day. (A legislative day begins when the Senate convenes and ends when it adjourns; hence, it does not necessarily coincide with the calendar day.)

The length of these speeches is not limited by the rules; thus, in most cases, senators may speak for as long as they please. Often, the Senate adopts unanimous consent agreements imposing time limits. In other cases (for example, for the budget process), limits are imposed by statute. In general, however, the right to unlimited debate is preserved.

The filibuster is an obstructionary tactic (see next topic below used to defeat bills and motions by prolonging debate indefinitely. A filibuster may entail, but does not actually require, long speeches, dilatory motions, and an extensive series of proposed amendments. The longest filibuster speech in the history of the Senate was delivered by Strom Thurmond, who spoke for over twenty-four hours in an unsuccessful attempt to block the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

The Senate may end a filibuster by invoking cloture. In most cases, cloture requires the support of three-fifths of the Senate; however, if the matter before the Senate involves changing the rules of the body, a two-thirds majority is required. Cloture is invoked very rarely, particularly because bipartisan support is usually necessary to obtain the required supermajority. If the Senate does invoke cloture, debate does not end immediately; instead, further debate is limited to thirty additional hours unless increased by another three-fifths vote.

When debate concludes, the motion in question is put to a vote. In many cases, the Senate votes by voice vote; the presiding officer puts the question, and Members respond either "Aye!" (in favor of the motion) or "No!" (against the motion). The presiding officer then announces the result of the voice vote. Any senator, however, may challenge the presiding officer's assessment and request a recorded vote. The request may be granted only if it is seconded by one-fifth of the senators present.

In practice, however, senators second requests for recorded votes as a matter of courtesy. When a recorded vote is held, the clerk calls the roll of the Senate in alphabetical order; each senator responds when their name is called. Senators who miss the roll call may still cast a vote as long as the recorded vote remains open. The vote is closed at the discretion of the presiding officer but must remain open for a minimum of fifteen minutes. If the vote is tied, the Vice President, if present, is entitled to a casting vote. If the Vice President is not present, however, the motion is resolved in the negative.

On occasion, the Senate may go into what is called a secret or closed session. During a closed session, the chamber doors are closed and the galleries are completely cleared of anyone not sworn to secrecy, not instructed in the rules of the closed session, or not essential to the session.

Closed sessions are quite rare and are usually held only under certain circumstances in which the Senate is discussing sensitive subject matter, such as information critical to national security, private communications from the President, or discussions of Senate deliberations during impeachment trials. Any Senator has the right to call a closed session as long as the motion is seconded.

Budget bills are governed under a special rule process called "Reconciliation" that disallows filibusters. Reconciliation was devised in 1974 but came into use in the early 1980s.

The Rules by number:

The Standing Rules of the Senate detail the rules of order of the United States Senate. The latest version was adopted on April 27, 2000 and comprises the following 43 rules.

The Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006 introduced a 44th rule on earmarks.
  1. SR Rule I: Appointment of a Senator to the Chair
  2. SR Rule II: Presentation of Credentials and Questions of Privilege
  3. SR Rule III: Oaths
  4. SR Rule IV: Commencement of Daily Sessions
  5. SR Rule V: Suspension and Amendment of the Rules
  6. SR Rule VI: Quorum - Absent Senators May Be Sent For
  7. SR Rule VII: Morning Business
  8. SR Rule VIII: Order of Business
  9. SR Rule IX: Messages
  10. SR Rule X: Special Orders
  11. SR Rule XI: Papers - Withdrawal, Printing, Reading of, and Reference
  12. SR Rule XII: Voting Procedure
  13. SR Rule XIII: Reconsideration
  14. SR Rule XIV: Joint Resolutions, and Preambles Thereto
  15. SR Rule XV: Amendments and Resolutions
  16. SR Rule XVI: Appropriations and Amendments to General Appropriation Bills
  17. SR Rule XVII: Reference to Committees; Motions to Discharge; Reports of Committees; and Hearings Available
  18. SR Rule XVIII: Business Continued from Session to Session
  19. SR Rule XIX: Debate
  20. SR Rule XX: Questions for Order
  21. SR Rule XXI: Session with Closed Doors
  22. SR Rule XXII: Precedence of Motions
  23. SR Rule XXIII: Privilege of the Floor
  24. SR Rule XXIV: Appointments of Committee
  25. SR Rule XXV: Standing Committees
  26. SR Rule XXVI: Committee Procedure
  27. SR Rule XXVII: Committee Staff
  28. SR Rule XXVIII: Conference Committees; Reports; Open Meetings
  29. SR Rule XXIX: Executive Sessions
  30. SR Rule XXX: Executive Session - Proceedings on Treaties
  31. SR Rule XXXI: Executive Session - Proceedings on Nominations
  32. SR Rule XXXII: The President Furnished with Copies of Record Executive Sessions
  33. SR Rule XXXIII: Senate Chamber - Senate Wing of the Capitol
  34. SR Rule XXXIV: Public Financial Disclosure
  35. SR Rule XXXV: Gifts
  36. SR Rule XXXVI: Outside Earned Income
  37. SR Rule XXXVII: Conflict of Interest
  38. SR Rule XXXVIII: Prohibition of Unofficial Office Accounts
  39. SR Rule XXXIX: Foreign Travel
  40. SR Rule XL: Franking Privilege and Radio and Television Studios
  41. SR Rule XLI: Political Fund Activity; Definitions
  42. SR Rule XLII: Employment Practices
  43. SR Rule XLIII: Representation by Members
  44. SR Rule XLIV: Congressionally Directed Spending and Related Items

See also: ___________________________________________________________________________

Filibuster in the United States Senate:

​Filibuster is a tactic used in the United States Senate to prevent a measure from being brought to a vote by means of obstruction. The most common form occurs when one or more senators attempt to delay or block a vote on a bill by extending debate on the measure.

The Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish, and on any topic they choose, unless "three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn" (currently 60 out of 100) vote to bring the debate to a close by invoking cloture under Senate Rule XXII.

The ability to block a measure through extended debate was an inadvertent side effect of an 1806 rule change, and was infrequently used during much of the 19th and 20th centuries. In 1970, the Senate adopted a "two-track" procedure to prevent filibusters from stopping all other Senate business.

The minority then felt politically safer in threatening filibusters more regularly, which became normalized over time to the point that 60 votes are now required to end debate on nearly every controversial legislative item. As a result, "the contemporary Senate has morphed into a 60-vote institution — the new normal for approving measures or matters — a fundamental transformation from earlier years."

Efforts to limit the practice include laws that explicitly limit the time for Senate debate, notably the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 that created the budget reconciliation process. Changes in 2013 and 2017 now require only a simple majority to invoke cloture on nominations, although most legislation still requires 60 votes.

One or more senators may still occasionally hold the floor for an extended period, sometimes without the advance knowledge of the Senate leadership. However, these "filibusters" usually result only in brief delays and do not determine outcomes, since the Senate's ability to act ultimately depends upon whether there are sufficient votes to invoke cloture and proceed to a final vote on passage.

However, such brief delays can be politically relevant when exercised shortly before a major deadline (such as avoiding a government shutdown) or before a Senate recess.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about the Senate Filibuster:






​​
United States Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade (1/24/2022) through the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Ruling Pictured below: Which States Would End Abortion If Roe V. Wade Was Overturned? (Forbes)
[Your WebHost: In the following we cover the original Roe v. Wade landmark decision that was enacted in 1973, enabling females to terminate pregnancies.

Then we cover the recent decision by the Supreme Court to renege on Roe v. Wade by terminating federal involvement in abortion, leaving it up to individual states to decide, a definite loss of women's rights to decide for themselves, particularly egregious for females who became pregnant through rape or incest!

Finally we cover an article in the Washington Post 6/26/2020 entitled "Seeking an abortion? Here’s how to avoid leaving a digital trail."]

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion.

​The decision struck down many federal and state abortion laws, and fueled an ongoing abortion debate in the United States about whether, or to what extent, abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, and what the role of moral and religious views in the political sphere should be. It also shaped debate concerning which methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication.

The case was brought by Norma McCorvey—known by the legal pseudonym "Jane Roe"—who in 1969 became pregnant with her third child. McCorvey wanted an abortion but lived in Texas, where abortion was illegal except when necessary to save the mother's life. Her attorneys, Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, filed a lawsuit on her behalf in U.S. federal court against her local district attorney, Henry Wade, alleging that Texas's abortion laws were unconstitutional.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled in her favor and declared the relevant Texas abortion statutes unconstitutional. The parties appealed this ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States.

On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy", which protects a pregnant woman's right to an abortion.

The Court also held that the right to abortion is not absolute and must be balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life. The Court resolved these competing interests by announcing a pregnancy trimester timetable to govern all abortion regulations in the United States:
  • During the first trimester, governments could not regulate abortion at all, except to require that abortions be performed by a licensed physician.
  • During the second trimester, governments could regulate the abortion procedure but only for the purpose of protecting maternal health and not for protecting fetal life.
  • After viability, which includes the third trimester of pregnancy and the last few weeks of the second trimester, abortions could be regulated and even prohibited, but only if the laws provided exceptions for abortions necessary to save the "life" or "health" of the mother. 

The Court also classified the right to abortion as "fundamental", which required courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the "strict scrutiny" standard, the most stringent level of judicial review in the United States.

The Supreme Court's decision in Roe was among the most controversial in U.S. history. Roe was criticized by some in the legal community, including some who support abortions-rights and thought that Roe reached the correct result but went about it the wrong way, and some have called the decision a form of judicial activism. 

Others argued that Roe did not go far enough, as it was placed within the framework of civil rights rather than the broader human rights. 

Anti-abortion politicians and activists sought for decades to overrule the decision; polls consistently show that a plurality and a majority, especially into the 21st century, opposed overruling Roe. Despite criticism of Roe, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its "central holding" in its 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey, although Casey overruled Roe's trimester framework and abandoned Roe's "strict scrutiny" standard in favor of a more malleable "undue burden" test.

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overruled Roe, which the majority opinion described as "egregiously wrong", in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization on the grounds that the U.S. Constitution makes no reference to abortion and was unknown in U.S. law until Roe.

This view was criticized by the dissent opinion and disputed by some law historians, who argued that many 21st-century rights that are taken for granted, such as contraceptive, interracial marriage, and same-sex marriage, are also not explicitly mentioned in the U.S Constitution. 

​The decision was supported and opposed by the anti-abortion and abortion-rights movements, respectively, and was generally condemned by international observers, figures and foreign leaders, including Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron, Olaf Scholz and others.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Roe vs. Wade: ___________________________________________________________________________

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (June 24, 2022)
(The repeal of Roe v. Wade that effectively prevents abortions at the Federal Level.)
​
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer any right to abortion, and overruled both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992).

The case was about the constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi state law that banned most abortion operations after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. Lower courts had prevented enforcement of the law with preliminary injunctions. The injunctions were based on the ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which had prevented states from banning abortion before fetal viability, generally within the first 24 weeks, on the basis that a woman's choice for abortion during that time is protected by rights of privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The ideological shift of the Supreme Court that culminated with the 2020 appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was outspoken against abortion before her appointment, made Dobbs a potential vehicle to challenge both Roe and Casey.

More than 20 states prepared legislation, including 13 with trigger laws, to strictly regulate abortion should Dobbs overturn Roe and Casey. Dobbs gained more attention in the wake of legal battles over the Texas Heartbeat Act, enacted in May 2021, leading to near record-setting amicus curiae submissions in Dobbs.

Oral arguments before the Supreme Court were held in December 2021. In May 2022, Politico published a leaked draft majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, which largely corresponded to the final decision issued on June 24, 2022.

The Court ruled, 6–3, to reverse the lower court rulings; a smaller majority of five justices joined the opinion overturning Roe and Casey. The majority opinion held that abortion was not a constitutional right, and that states should have discretion in regulating abortion.

Chief Justice Roberts agreed with the judgment upholding the Mississippi law but did not join the majority in the opinion to overturn Roe and Casey.

Most Republican politicians praised the decision, while most Democratic politicians denounced it, as did many international observers. Many Catholic Church and Southern Baptist officials released statements in support of the decision, but other Christian denominations, and Jewish organizations, were opposed.

​Protests and counterprotests regarding the decision occurred in many U.S. cities, and some protests against the decision occurred in other countries as well. The decision was divisive among the American public with 55% opposed to the overturning of Roe and Casey. 

​Background:
Further information: ​
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade (see above), a 1973 landmark decision, that the right to privacy within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution includes a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy.

The Court partly reaffirmed this in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a 1992 case that also struck down Roe's pregnancy trimester framework in favor of a fetal viability standard, typically 23 or 24 weeks into pregnancy. Casey held those state laws that restrict abortion before the fetus is viable create an undue burden on women seeking abortions, and are unconstitutional because they violate the Due Process Clause, a woman's right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Court also ruled that this right is not absolute and must be balanced with possible government interest and may be affected by medical advancements that allow premature babies to survive at younger gestational ages.

After Roe, there was a political realignment surrounding abortion in the U.S. As anti-abortion rights advocates accused the abortion rights movement of racism, the abortion-rights movement responded by changing its rhetoric.

Instead of emphasizing national policy benefits of abortion, such as smaller welfare expenses, slower population growth, and fewer illegitimate births, it took up choice and rights-oriented rhetoric similar to what was used in the Roe decision.

Opponents of abortion experienced a political shift. The Catholic Church and the Democratic Party supported an expansive welfare state, wanted to reduce rates of abortion through prenatal insurance and federally funded day care, and opposed abortion at the time of Roe.

The anti-abortion rights movement shifted to Protestant faiths that saw abortion rights as part of a liberal-heavy agenda to fight against and became part of the new Christian right. The Protestant influence led to opposition to abortion being made part of the Republican Party's platform by the 1990s.

Republican-led states enacted laws to restrict abortion, including abortions earlier than Casey's general standard of 24 weeks. The courts enjoined most of these laws. The use of fetal viability as a standard was questioned in U.S. abortion-related cases after Casey, including by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in her dissenting opinion in City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health. These opinions argued that there are other scientific, philosophical, and moral considerations involved.

During the Roberts Court under Chief Justice John Roberts since 2005, there has often been a 5–4 conservative majority with the potential to overturn Roe and Casey. Roberts is a strong proponent of stare decisis, believing that even some wrongly decided cases should not be overturned, as well as a staunch defender of the Court's reputation.

Since 2018, the Court's ideological makeup with respect to abortion rights shifted, with Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh's appointments alongside Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.

Several Republican-majority states passed bills restricting abortions, anticipating a potential legal shift from the Supreme Court and providing possible case vehicles for bringing the issue to the Supreme Court. When Amy Coney Barrett replaced Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court's ideological makeup shifted further and created an opportunity to overturn or additionally limit Roe.

Ginsburg had generally been in the majority of past Supreme Court cases that enjoined stricter abortion laws. Conversely, political analysts see Barrett as having anti-abortion views; in 1998, she wrote in a law journal article that abortion is "always immoral".

Gestational Age Act:
See also: Abortion in Mississippi § Legislative history

In March 2018, the Mississippi Legislature passed the Gestational Age Act, which banned any abortion operation after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions for a medical emergency or severe fetal abnormality but none for cases of rape or incest.

The medical emergency exception allows abortions done to save the life of a pregnant woman and in situations where "the continuation of the pregnancy will create a serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function".

The severe fetal abnormality exception allows abortions of fetuses whose defects will leave them incapable of living outside the womb.

The legislature justified this prohibition on the basis that abortions for nontherapeutic or elective reasons was "a barbaric practice, dangerous for the maternal patient, and demeaning to the medical profession". Another basis was that the abortion procedures forbidden under the Act were said by the legislature to carry "significant physical and psychological risks" and could cause various medical complications.

Governor Phil Bryant signed the bill into law, saying he was "committed to making Mississippi the safest place in America for an unborn child, and this bill will help us achieve that goal". He added, "We'll probably be sued here in about a half hour, and that'll be fine with me. It is worth fighting over."

Lower courts:

Within a day of the Gestational Age Act's passage, Mississippi's only abortion clinic, Jackson Women's Health Organization, and one of its doctors, Sacheen Carr-Ellis, sued state officials Thomas E. Dobbs, state health officer with the Mississippi State Department of Health, and Kenneth Cleveland, executive director of the Mississippi State Board of Medical Licensure, to challenge the Act's constitutionality.

The clinic does surgical abortions up to 16 weeks' gestation and is represented in court by the Center for Reproductive Rights. The case was heard by Judge Carlton W. Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. In November 2018, Reeves ruled for the clinic and placed an injunction on Mississippi enjoining it from enforcing the Act.

Reeves wrote that based on evidence that viability of the fetus begins between 23 and 24 weeks, Mississippi had "no legitimate state interest strong enough, prior to viability, to justify a ban on abortions". Dobbs sought to have the judges consider whether fetal pain might be possible after 15 weeks, but the District Court ruled his evidence "inadmissible and irrelevant".

The state appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which upheld Reeves's ruling in a 3–0 decision in December 2019. Senior Circuit Judge Patrick Higginbotham wrote for the Court, "In an unbroken line dating to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's abortion cases have established (and affirmed, and re-affirmed) a woman's right to choose an abortion before viability.

States may regulate abortion procedures prior to viability so long as they do not impose an undue burden on the woman's right, but they may not ban abortions." A request for an en banc rehearing was denied.

In May 2019, the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi issued another injunction, this time against a newly passed Mississippi abortion law. This was a heartbeat bill that forbade most abortions when a fetus's heartbeat could be detected, which is usually from 6 to 12 weeks into pregnancy.

In a February 2020 per curiam decision, the Fifth Circuit also upheld the second injunction. The Fifth Circuit's statements for both injunctions were similar because they both cited the lack of fetal viability during earlier stages of gestation as a reason to enjoin the laws.

​Supreme Court:
​
Mississippi petitioned its appeal of the Fifth Circuit decisions to the Supreme Court in June 2020. Its petition, filed by Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, focused on three questions from the appeals process. 

In its petition, Mississippi asked the Court to revisit the viability standard on the basis of the standard's inflexibility, as well as inadequate accommodation of present understandings of life before birth. 

The filing stated that fetuses can detect pain and respond to it at 10–12 weeks gestational age, and asked the Court to allow the prohibition of "inhumane procedures". The petition also contended that the viability standard inadequately addresses the protection of potential human life. Mississippi considered this a State interest from the "onset of the pregnancy" onward.

A response brief focused on two questions asked in opposition to the petition was filed by Hillary Schneller from the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Jackson Women's Health Organization (JWHO). JWHO asked the Court to deny Mississippi's petition due to judicial precedent. 

The brief said that both the District Court and the Fifth Circuit found the Mississippi law unconstitutional by properly applying precedent in a manner that did not conflict with other courts' decisions, and argued that there was therefore nothing about the case that "warrants this Court's intervention". 

The brief also argued that Mississippi was misinterpreting its role in abortion regulation. While the state thought that its interest was greater than the individual right to abortion, JWHO argued that Mississippi's vested interest in regulating abortion was insufficient to ban it before viability, making the Gestational Age Act "unconstitutional by any measure".

The petition went through review at more than a dozen conferences for the Court, which is unusual for most cases. The Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari on May 17, 2021, limiting the Court's review to a single question, "Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional." 

Over 140 amici curiae briefs were submitted before oral argument in Dobbs, approaching the record set by Obergefell v. Hodges, in part to separate and concurrent lawsuits filed over the Texas Heartbeat Act, which effectively gave citizens of the state the means to enforce abortion bans through civil suits.

Oral argument:

The case was heard on December 1, 2021. During the oral arguments, Mississippi, represented by Solicitor General Scott G. Stewart, argued that the Constitution does not directly guarantee a right to abortion. Because of this, he said that laws about abortion should be evaluated on a rational basis review instead of the higher level of scrutiny required by the undue burden standard. 

Stewart also argued for overturning Roe and Casey on the basis that the decisions were unworkable and that new facts have come to light since the two decisions were made. He argued that scientific knowledge has grown about "what we know the child is doing and looks like", and he claimed that we now know that fetuses are "fully human" even "very early" in gestation. 

Stewart also defended Mississippi's claim in its briefs that new medical advances with viability were at odds with past assumptions made when formulating the viability line. Also, he claimed that the understanding about when fetuses begin to feel pain has grown. Stewart maintained that because of the decisions in Roe and Casey, the government is being kept from responding to these facts by prohibiting pre-viability abortions.

JWHO, represented by Julie Rikelman, argued that the Court should not overrule the two decisions because the viability standard was correct. According to Rikelman, Mississippi's arguments against Roe were not new, but instead similar to the ones Pennsylvania made during Casey. 

Since Roe's essential holding was upheld for Casey, she said that the Court should do the same here, since there had been no new changes in the laws and facts since then that could justify changing the Court's position. 

Rikelman argued that Mississippi's argument against using the undue burden standard was wrong because the standard actually specifically applies to post-viability abortion regulations rather than to the prohibition of abortions before viability. She told the Court that the undue burden standard was workable, and the viability line incorporated into the standard was likewise workable. She said that for 50 years the viability line had been clearly and consistently applied in the courts.

U.S. Solicitor General, Elizabeth Barchas Prelogar, argued that Roe and Casey should not be overruled. She argued that there has been a substantial reliance on the right to abortion by both individuals and society, and that the Court "has never revoked a right that is so fundamental to so many Americans and so central to their ability to participate fully and equally in society."

Based on their analysis of the questioning, Court observers said that its six conservative members were likely to uphold Mississippi's law. Chief Justice John Roberts appeared to suggest that viability was not relevant to the holdings of either Roe or Casey, and that only a fair choice or opportunity to seek an abortion was constitutionally protected. The other conservative justices appeared to be ready to overturn Roe and Casey.

Leaked draft opinion:
​See also: List of United States Supreme Court leaks

​On May 2, 2022, Politico released a draft of a majority opinion by Justice Samuel Alito circulated among the justices in February 2022. The draft opinion would overturn Roe and Casey.

Alito's draft called the Roe decision "egregiously wrong from the start", arguing that abortion is not listed in the Constitution as a protected right, and instead would allow states to decide on abortion restrictions or guarantees under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

A New York Times article compared the history sources cited by Judge Alito in the draft opinion with information provided by historians and shed some light on the history of abortion in the United States.

Sources told Politico that Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett had voted in conference with Alito in December and their positions had remained unchanged as of May 2022, though it is unclear whether they agreed with Alito's draft, as no other drafts in concurrence or dissent had yet been circulated. 

According to CNN, Chief Justice Roberts voted to uphold the Gestational Age Act but "did not want to completely overturn Roe v. Wade". The Washington Post reported from court sources that Roberts had been working since December 2021 on his own opinion, which would uphold Roe while narrowly allowing the Mississippi law to take effect.

The Supreme Court confirmed the draft's authenticity the next day; at the same time, the Supreme Court's press release said that "it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case". 

Roberts said that he had directed the Marshal of the United States Supreme Court, Gail A. Curley, to investigate the news leak and that "to the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed."' 

The leak probe is in progress, and CNN reported on May 31 that law clerks were asked to provide private cell phone records and sign affidavits. The unprecedented move has alarmed some clerks into exploring whether to hire independent counsel.
​
In response to the leak, Chief Justice Roberts said, "The work of the Court will not be affected in any way." At an Eleventh Circuit judicial conference, he called the leak "absolutely appalling" and said that "one bad apple" should not change "people's perception" of the Supreme Court. 

Justice Thomas commented that the Court should not be "bullied" into delivering preferred outcomes and repeated his criticisms of stare decisis. He later added that the leak was an "unthinkable breach of trust" that "fundamentally" changed the Court.

Leaks about Supreme Court deliberations in a pending case are rare, and a leak of a draft decision is unprecedented. There is uncertainty about whether the leak violated federal laws, and experts differ as to whether the U.S. Department of Justice is likely to pursue criminal charges.

Reactions:
See also: 2022 abortion rights protests in the United States

​Within hours of the news of the leak, both pro-abortion rights and anti-abortion rights protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere in the U.S. The response to the draft put unusual public pressure on the Court as it made its decision in the case. 

While over 450 large-scale marches and protests organized by Planned Parenthood, Women's March, and other groups under the name "Bans Off Our Bodies" were planned for 2022, the organizers pushed the event up to May 14, 2022, after the opinion leaked.

The organizers said, "Folks are mobilizing because they see that the hour is later than we thought" and that the event would lead off a "summer of rage" if Roe and Casey were overturned. 

A leaked Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memo indicated that DHS was preparing for a surge of political violence on public officials, clergy, and abortion providers after the ruling. A DHS bulletin warned that the leak had spawned further violence in the summer before the 2022 midterms. A number of isolated attacks on crisis pregnancy centers were reported in May and June 2022 after the leak.

Nonviolent protests were held outside some of the justices' homes, leading the U.S. Senate to unanimously pass a bill that would temporarily expand protections for the justices and their families; that bill has stalled in the U.S. House of Representatives. 

Republicans have argued that those protests violate a 1950 federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1507) that criminalizes attempting to influence a judge in the course of their official duties by demonstrating near their residence. A man from California was arrested for attempted murder of Justice Kavanaugh near his home over the leak, as well as a pending decision in a gun control case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen.

The leak renewed calls from Democrats, including President Joe Biden and pro-abortion rights activists, for the Senate to pass the Women's Health Protection Act, which had already passed the House of Representatives, to codify the rights established by Roe and Casey before Dobbs was decided and supersede the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. 

It failed to pass in the Senate on May 11, after a 49–51 vote that, as expected, primarily fell along party lines. Biden denounced the draft opinion as "radical" and said that same-sex marriage and birth control were also at risk.

Republicans immediately condemned the leak and called for the Supreme Court and Department of Justice, including the FBI, to launch an investigation. Twenty-two members of Congress signed a letter asking the U.S. Attorney General and FBI director to investigate. 

House Republican leadership issued a joint statement that called the leak "a clearly coordinated campaign to intimidate and obstruct the Justices".

In May 2022, the Marquette University Law School released a poll showing a drastic change of public opinion of the Supreme Court. In March 2022, when the survey was last conducted, 54% of respondents said they approved of the nine justices and 45% said they disapproved.

In the newest survey, only 44% of respondents reported approval. In June 2022, a Gallup poll showed confidence in the Supreme Court at 25%, down from 36% in 2021, and the lowest in 50 years.

Opinion of the Court:

The Court issued its decision on June 24, 2022. In a 6–3 judgment, the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit's decision and remanded the case for further review. The majority opinion, joined by five of the justices, held that abortion was not a protected right under the Constitution, overturning both Roe and Casey, and returned the decision regarding abortion regulations back to the states. 

As a result, Dobbs is considered a landmark decision of the Court.

Majority opinion:

​The majority decision was written by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. The final majority decision was substantially similar to the leaked draft, with only minor changes in the original arguments and adding rebuttals to the dissenting opinion and Roberts' concurrence in judgment.

The majority opinion, written by Alito, relied on a constitutional historical view of abortion rights, saying, "The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision." He wrote that "abortion couldn't be constitutionally protected.

Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely unknown in American law. Indeed, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three quarters of the States made abortion a crime at all stages of pregnancy." Some historians argued that this view is incomplete, and in the view of Leslie J. Reagan, a professor of history and law at the University of Illinois, Alito "speciously claims" the truth of his assertions.

Alito stated that "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division." 

Alito further argued that the right to an abortion was different from other privacy rights. He wrote, "What sharply distinguishes the abortion right from the rights recognized in the cases on which Roe and Casey rely is something that both those decisions acknowledged: Abortion destroys what those decisions call 'potential life' and what the law at issue in this case regards as the life of an 'unborn human being'."

In addition to the existing language from the draft, Alito also responded to the dissent opinion in the final decision, stating "the dissent is very candid that it cannot show that a constitutional right to abortion has any foundation, let alone a 'deeply rooted' one, 'in this Nation's history and tradition'.

The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right – no state constitutional provision or statute, no federal or state judicial precedent, not even a scholarly treatise." He also addressed the concerns of the dissenting opinion that Dobbs would extend to other rights, stating that the extent of the majority opinion on Dobbs applied only to abortion.

Alito further responded to Roberts' concurrence in judgement seeking middle ground, claiming there are "serious problems with this approach" that would only prolong what he described as the turmoil of Roe. Alito argued that by only ruling that Mississippi's 15-week law is constitutional, the Court would have to later decide whether other states' laws with different deadlines for obtaining an abortion were constitutional.

Since Roberts did not claim there was a constitutional right to an abortion, Alito rejected any constitutional grounds for upholding a "reasonable opportunity" to obtain an abortion and called Roberts' proposal unconstitutional.

Concurrences:

Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh wrote separate concurrences. Thomas argued that the Court should go further in future cases, reconsidering other past Supreme Court cases that granted rights based on substantive due process, such as Griswold v. Connecticut (the right to contraception), Obergefell v. Hodges (same-sex marriage), and Lawrence v. Texas (banned laws against sodomy).

Thomas wrote, "Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents."

Kavanaugh wrote separately, making multiple comments. He stated that it would still be unconstitutional to prohibit a woman from going to another state to seek an abortion under the right to travel, and that it would be unconstitutional to retroactively punish abortions performed before Dobbs when they had been protected by Roe and Casey.

Concurrence in judgment:

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote separately concurring in the judgment, in that he believed the Court should reverse the Fifth Circuit's opinion on the Mississippi law and that "the viability line established by Roe and Casey should be discarded." Roberts did not agree with the majority's ruling to overturn Roe and Casey in their entirety, finding it "unnecessary to decide the case before us". 

Roberts suggested a more narrow opinion to justify the constitutionality of Mississippi's law without addressing the question of whether to overturn Roe and Casey. Roberts also wrote that abortion regulations should "extend far enough to ensure a reasonable opportunity to choose, but does not to extend any further." He said that the Court should "leave for another day whether to reject any right to an abortion at all."

Dissent:

Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor jointly wrote the dissent. The three wrote:
  • "The majority would allow States to ban abortion from conception onward because it does not think forced childbirth at all implicates a woman's rights to equality and freedom. Today's Court, that is, does not think there is anything of constitutional significance attached to a woman's control of her body and the path of her life.
  • A State can force her to bring a pregnancy to term, even at the steepest personal and familial costs." They concluded, "With sorrow—for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection—we dissent."

The three further wrote in response to Thomas' concurrence:
  • "The right Roe and Casey recognized does not stand alone. To the contrary, the Court has linked it for decades to other settled freedoms involving bodily integrity, familial relationships, and procreation.
  • Most obviously, the right to terminate a pregnancy arose straight out of the right to purchase and use contraception. In turn, those rights led, more recently, to rights of same-sex intimacy and marriage. Either the mass of the majority's opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other."

Impact:

Pre-decision:

After the Dobbs litigation began, the Texas Heartbeat Act was enacted on September 1, 2021. Two lawsuits challenging the law, Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson and United States v. Texas, quickly propagated through the court systems and reached the Supreme Court.

Oral arguments for both cases were on November 1, 2021, and decisions for both issued in December 2021. The decisions primarily focused on standing rather than directly addressing constitutional matters and abortion-related issues.

The decisions in both cases allowed the Texas Heartbeat Act to remain in force while litigation continued in lower courts. But concern that the Supreme Court was hearing three abortion-related cases in the 2021–22 term led to the near record number of amici curiae briefs filed for Dobbs before the December 1, 2021, oral hearings.

​Georgia passed Georgia House Bill 481, best known as the Living Infants Fairness Equality (LIFE) Act, in 2019. The law banned most abortions after a fetal heartbeat was detected.

There were multiple exceptions for abortions between six and 20 weeks: if the fetus is conceived by rape or incest, the pregnancy is medically futile, or the pregnancy threatens the mother's life. 

In addition, the law revised who is considered a legal person, allowing pregnant women to receive child support and tax deductions for their offspring before birth. 

In October 2019, the LIFE Act was challenged and deemed unconstitutional under Roe by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Georgia appealed this ruling to the Eleventh Circuit, but because Dobbs was scheduled to be argued in December 2021, the Circuit Court issued a stay of review until after the Supreme Court decided Dobbs.

At least 22 states with Republican leadership either passed or were in the process of passing anti-abortion related bills when the Supreme Court agreed to hear Dobbs in May 2021. Enforcement of most of the new laws was enjoined by courts, but they became enforceable after Roe was overturned. 

Thirteen states have trigger laws that will ban most abortions in the first and second trimesters if Roe is overturned. The states with trigger laws are as follows:

The states with trigger laws are: 
Nine states, among them Alabama (Human Life Protection Act), Arizona, Arkansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, never repealed their pre-Roe abortion bans, such as the Texas abortion statutes (1961). Those laws were not criminally enforceable due to Roe but would be enforceable with Roe being overturned.

At least some Democratic attorneys general or candidates for attorneys general have pledged not to enforce anti-abortion laws and prevent or hinder local prosecutors' efforts to enforce them, whereas at least some Republicans have pledged to enforce new state bans.

Post-decision:
​
The overturning of Roe did not make abortion illegal in all fifty states, contrary to a common misconception. While abortion remains legal in several states, states with trigger laws to restrict abortion in the event that Roe was overturned immediately implemented them. 

Multiple Republican governors and attorneys general moved to call special sessions to implement abortion bans or invoke their trigger laws to immediately ban abortion. 

Additionally, some states had older laws which restricted abortion but had been put on hold after Roe; with the decision from Dobbs, these states reviewed means to bring back the enforcement of these older laws. Lawsuits seeking to challenge both existing and new trigger laws based on states' constitutions were filed in multiple states, seeking injunctions to allow abortion to continue in these states until the cases were revolved.

Abortion laws in states that allow abortion are expected to become more permissive following the ruling, not less; proposals by California, Oregon, and Washington have included expanding abortion access by eliminating co-pays for abortion services, funding travel costs for those seeking abortion from states that ban abortion, and enshrining the right to an abortion within state constitutions. 

Prior to the Supreme Court decision, the legislature of Vermont had already approved sending Proposal 5, which would amend the state's constitution "to guarantee sexual and reproductive freedoms" to a referendum in November 2022. 

Some U.S. House Republicans have proposed the implementation of a nationwide 15-week abortion ban following the ruling, while over 100 have signed onto a six-week abortion ban.

Top House Republicans have been reported to be wary of such plans, instead favoring a nationwide ban on late-term abortions only.

The Court's decision also sparked concern over access to medication abortion options, including the prescription of mifepristone and misoprostol. These medications have been approved for use by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) within the first ten weeks of pregnancy. 

Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra asserted that after the Dobbs decision, "We stand unwavering in our commitment to ensure every American has access to health care and the ability to make decisions about health care – including the right to safe and legal abortion, such as medication abortion that has been approved by the FDA for over 20 years." 

Despite the federal stance, states opposed to abortion were considering laws to ban access to medical abortion, including out-of-state shipments in the U.S. mail and telemedicine support.

States that support abortion rights expected an influx of requests for medical abortion.

Privacy rights related to data tracking through Internet usage, mobile phone usage, and mobile applications have been raised after the leak and subsequently after the decision. This information could be used by states with strict abortion laws to determine if women were seeking to have abortions. 

In addition to users taking steps to minimize their data footprint, groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation urged companies that make these apps to take steps to reduce the amount of data they collect and use end-to-end encryption to further aid those seeking abortions outside of states that have banned them.

The Court's decision in Dobbs was expected to elevate abortion rights as a major issue in the 2022 United States elections in November 2022. Democrats, which generally support abortion rights, planned to use the issue to try to offshoot the rising inflation and Biden's lower approval rating when Dobbs was announced.

Republicans, who were planning to try to retake seats in both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate as well as within several state governor and legislation positions but facing tight races, had some concern that the negative reaction to Dobbs could work against them, but argue that by the time of the elections in November, there will be more focus on the economy and other issues they expect to win on.

​Legal analysis:

The ruling has been said to create an independent legal framework by many legal observers, as the ruling laid out a state's ability to determine independent abortion laws. 

As many states have rulings prosecuting abortions even out of state, some have argued that this produces a legal framework in which a US state can act more similar to that of a sovereign country, prosecuting individuals from taking actions outside of the legal jurisdiction of a state. 

The enforceability and practicality of such a decision has been criticized, under which it could produce a legal framework of division under the state legal system. 

The ruling has been seen in the context of ever increasing partisanship and political division in the country.

The decision raised concerns about similar rights granted by the Court that were not enumerated within the Constitution. Alito's opinion had stated that the Fourteenth Amendment only covered those rights that were deep-seated at the time of its ratification in 1869, which did not include abortion, but further stated that the opinion was strictly limited to rights related to abortion.

However, according to Thomas' concurrence, the right to contraceptives and to same-sex marriage would be challenged based on Dobbs since these rights were also not recognized during the 19th century. Legal experts cautioned that the interpretation of the Constitution by both Alito and Thomas would be harmful to women, minorities, and other marginalized groups.

University of Colorado Boulder associate professor of law Scott Skinner-Thompson said, "The Court has for a long, long time said: Look, if we define liberty only in terms of what was permitted at the time of ratification of the Bill of Rights or the 14th Amendment, then we’re stuck in time. Because in the 18th and 19th centuries, this country was not very free for many, many people — particularly women, particularly people of color."

​Reactions to the decision:

Support:

The anti-abortion movement in the United States praised the ruling. The National Right to Life Committee supported the ruling.

Political:

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell praised the decision as "courageous and correct". Many other members of the Republican Party in Congress also expressed their approval. 

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, and Chair of the House Republican Conference Elise Stefanik released a joint statement saying in part that "[every] unborn child is precious, extraordinary, and worthy of protection." 

Texas Senator John Cornyn responded to Obama's criticism of overruling precedent by tweeting "now do Plessy vs Ferguson/Brown vs Board of Education"; the latter Supreme Court decision had overruled the former, a then-58 year old precedent in that racial segregation was unconstitutional. Republican Senators Marsha Blackburn, Cindy Hyde-Smith, and Bill Hagerty also praised the Court's ruling.

In a statement, former president Donald Trump took credit for the decision and called it "the biggest WIN for LIFE in a generation", although, in private, Trump has been more ambivalent about overturning Roe and has said it would be "bad for Republicans" since it could lead to backlash among suburban female voters in the upcoming midterm elections.

Former vice president Mike Pence also praised the decision, stating that "life won".

Republican Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said, "By properly interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has answered the prayers of millions upon millions of Americans," adding that he would work to further restrict abortion in Florida. 

A new law in Florida, currently under review by state courts, would restrict abortions to 15 weeks of pregnancy, formerly 24, providing exceptions for neither rape nor incest. Florida Senate President Wilton Simpson, also a Republican, who was adopted as a child, argued the Court's decision would promote adoption as an alternative to abortion. Simpson said, "Florida is a state that values life."

Religious:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention praised the ruling, with Catholic Archbishops José Horacio Gómez and William E. Lori, and Southern Baptist President Bart Barber, issuing statements for their organizations. 

Numerous Catholic bishops also issued individual statements in support of the ruling, including: 
The Anglican Church in North America praised the ruling, with Archbishop Foley Beach releasing a statement on the matter.

Opposition:

The abortion-rights movement in the United States opposed the ruling.

Political:

President Joe Biden said, "It's a sad day for the Court and for the country ... the health and life of women in this nation are now at risk." Former president Barack Obama criticized the ruling as "attacking the essential freedoms of millions of Americans". 

U.S. Attorney General, Merrick Garland, criticized the ruling in a statement and warned states to not forbid women to seek out-of-state abortions. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra called the decision "unconscionable" and said that abortion is an essential part of healthcare. 

The decision is viewed by Elizabeth Warren as the majority of the Supreme Court allowing religious affiliations to dictate their ruling in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

Many members of the Democratic Party in Congress expressed their disappointment with the decision, with the Democratic National Committee stating in part that "American people don't want any of this".

Senator Susan Collins, a Republican who supports abortion rights and voted in the Senate to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh, expressed that she "[feels] misled" by Justice Kavanaugh, who said in a private meeting with her that he would not overrule Roe. Collins alleged that Kavanaugh assured her during that meeting that he is "a don't-rock-the-boat kind of judge". 

Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, who crossed party lines and voted to confirm both Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch, expressed similar views about their potential perjury, stating in part, "I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans."

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican, expressed disappointment in the decision and signed an executive order protecting abortion rights in the state.

Governors Jay Inslee, Kate Brown, and Gavin Newsom of Washington, Oregon, and California, respectively, announced a formation of the "West Coast offense," a joint policy to allow and protect abortion rights.

​Civil rights:

Multiple civil and reproductive rights groups, including the NAACP, criticized the decision, and the Congressional Black Caucus called for the declaration of a national emergency. Liberals argued that the ruling and Thomas' concurrence created the potential to jeopardize other civil rights. 

The decision in Dobbs was condemned by Harvard-affiliated law and public health experts. Laurence H. Tribe, a constitutional scholar and a professor at Harvard Law School, called the Court's decision not only "reactionary" and "unprincipled" but as also damaging the very concept of Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

Linda Coffee, a leading attorney for Norma McCorvey in Roe v. Wade, said the Supreme Court's decision to overturn it "flies in the face of American freedom" and "destroys dignity of all American women". 

Jim Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the U.S. Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriage, criticized Thomas, whose own interracial marriage required Loving v. Virginia in order to be recognized by all states, for urging the Court to revisit and overrule its prior decisions.

Medical and academic:

The president and CEO of the Association of American Medical Colleges, David J. Skorton, released a statement stating that the decision "will significantly limit access for so many and increase health inequities across the country, ultimately putting women's lives at risk, at the very time that we should be redoubling our commitment to patient-centered, evidence-based care that promotes better health for all individuals and communities."

The statement further affirmed their commitment to providing abortion access, stating that it "will continue working with our medical schools and teaching hospitals to ensure that physicians are able to provide all patients with safe, effective, and accessible health care when they need it." 

The president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Dr. Moria Szilagyi, released a similar statement that the organization reaffirmed the policy to support "adolescents right to comprehensive, evidence-based reproductive healthcare services" which includes abortion.

She continued that the ruling threatened the health and safety of adolescents and jeopardized the patient-physician relationship.

Academics from the University of Minnesota School of Public Health and University of Colorado Boulder, criticized the ruling stating that as there are going to be an increase in pregnancy there will be an increase in maternal and infant deaths. Increasing on top of the 23.8 deaths for every 100,000 births in 2020, the highest maternal mortality rate of any developed country, with black mothers 2.9 times more likely to die than their white counter parts.

Religious:

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the United Church of Christ (UCC) criticized the ruling, with Lutheran Bishop Elizabeth Eaton and the UCC's General Ministers issuing statements. 

Bishop Michael Curry of the Episcopal Church declared himself to be "deeply grieved" by the Supreme Court decision. Several Jewish organizations, citing traditional acceptance of abortion, opposed the decision.

International:

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, said that the opinion "represents a major setback after five decades of protection for sexual and reproductive health and rights".

Western world foreign leaders generally condemned the ruling.:
  • Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the decision "horrific", while pledging, "[I]n Canada, we will always defend the woman's right to choose". 
  • British Prime Minister Boris Johnson called the decision "a big step backwards", while reassuring that there were laws "throughout the UK" for a "woman's right to choose".
  • Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo said that he was "very concerned about implications of U.S. Supreme Court decision", as well as "the signal it sends to the world". 
  • French President Emmanuel Macron said "abortion is a fundamental right for all women. It must be protected." He expressed his "solidarity" with U.S. women. 
  • Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called the decision "a huge setback" and said that her "heart cries for girls and women in the United States". 
  • New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern called the decision "incredibly upsetting" and "a loss for women everywhere". 
  • Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said he was "really troubled" by the decision, saying it is "a major step back in the fight for women's rights". 
  • Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said that "we cannot take any right for granted" and that "women must be able to decide freely about their lives".
  • President of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, praised the ruling, stating that it was "a powerful invitation to reflect together on the serious and urgent issue of human generativity and the conditions that make it possible".

Media:

The editorial boards of The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Houston Chronicle, Miami Herald, Detroit Free Press, and The Denver Post opposed the ruling, while the senior editorial staff of National Review and the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal supported the ruling.

Public:
​See also: 2022 abortion rights protests in the United States

The decision was divisive among the American public. Opinion surveys showed that 55% to 60% of respondents opposed overturning Roe. A 2022 Gallup poll showed that 67% of Americans support abortion in the first three months of pregnancy, and a CBS/YouGov poll showed that 58% of Americans support a federal law to protect abortion nationwide.

Numerous protesters on both sides of the issues gathered at the Supreme Court building after the decision's announcement, and while they created a confrontational environment, they remained peaceful for the most part.

Clashes between police and protesters, resulting in tear gas being used, as well as arrests, have occurred in Phoenix, New York City, and Los Angeles. Other protests have also taken place including in New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, as well as solidarity protests in London, Toronto, and Berlin, and are planned to take place throughout the US over the days after the opinion was announced. 

The DHS issued a memo to law enforcement agencies and first responders to be aware of potential extremist violence in the weeks following the Dobbs decision, particularly at federal and state government offices, abortion clinics and other health provides, and at faith-based organizations.

Others:

Corporations that said they would cover travel benefits for employees seeking abortions in states that protected abortion access,  include: 
Levi Strauss & Co. affirmed their support for abortion access. 

Several technology executives have condemned the ruling, including: 
Multiple celebrities criticized the ruling:
See also:
Written opinions Texts of the two state laws Oral arguments ​___________________________________________________________________________

Seeking an abortion? Here’s how to avoid leaving a digital trail.
​Everything you should do to keep your information safe, from incognito browsing to turning off location tracking.

​By Heather Kelly, Tatum Hunter,  and Danielle Abril (Washington Post: June 26, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. EDT)

Everything you do online is already tracked. That information is about to become even more sensitive if you’re seeking an abortion in the United States.

Friday’s Supreme Court decision overturning the landmark abortion rights ruling Roe v. Wade means 13 states could outlaw abortions within a month, and more could follow.

Help Desk: Technology coverage that makes tech work for you

A Google search for a reproductive health clinic, online order for abortion pills, location ping at a doctor’s office and text message about considering ending a pregnancy could all become sources of evidence.

People constantly share data about their fertility online, privacy advocates say — even if they don’t realize it. Other obvious sources of health data include period-tracking apps and digital check-in forms at hospitals.

“People should not be responsible for doing everything perfectly, when they’re in a stressful situation, to protect our own privacy,” said India McKinney, director of federal affairs for the privacy advocacy organization Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Privacy is a fundamental human right, and it should be protected in law and statutes.”

The following are the basic steps anyone can take to protect personal information when weighing an abortion:

Limit who you tell:

Your biggest risk factor is other people. Many cases against people who had abortions start with people they’ve told who report them to law enforcement, according to Farah Diaz-Tello, senior counsel and legal director for If/When/How, a reproductive justice nonprofit.

“The biggest vector for criminalization is the health-care system,” Diaz-Tello said. The group has studied cases against people who’ve had abortions since 2000 and tracked how the process typically happens.

When someone goes to a health provider with medical issues related to an abortion, medical professionals can report them to the police, who can then seize their phones or computers.

With a device in hand, police can just look through the browser and text messages directly.
Diaz-Tello recommends being judicious about what information you share in an emergency room or doctor’s office. A miscarriage and a self-managed abortion using pills will look identical to most health-care providers and require the same treatment, she said.

Limit who you tell in your own life as well, including friends or family. If you’re experiencing intimate partner threats, take these steps to protect your communications and devices.

Reclaim your digital life during or after an abusive relationship

Chat on a secure, encrypted messaging app:
​
When you do discuss your situation, use private messaging apps that use encryption. Apple’s iMessage, Meta’s WhatsApp and Signal are all end-to-end encrypted by default, which means messages are obscured from everyone except the sender and receiver.

Signal may be the most secure option. Apple has the key to decrypt iMessages that are backed up using its iCloud service, and law enforcement could ask it to do so. WhatsApp, for its part, leaves room in its privacy policy to share data with Facebook parent company Meta. Depending on what data it shares, that could raise privacy problems.

Protect your devices

Keep in mind that someone with access to your physical device could view your messages, whether or not they’re encrypted. Don’t turn your phone or laptop over to law enforcement without a warrant, privacy experts advise, and turn off biometric authentication such as Face or Touch ID if you’re worried about someone pressuring or forcing you to unlock them.

Make sure your phone, tablet and computers all require a passcode or password to use them. Avoid wearing any health-tracking wearables while managing your health.

Browse the internet securely

​There are two ways your browsing activity could put you at risk: someone seeing it on your device, and someone obtaining it from tech or ad-tech companies, said Eric Rescorla, chief technology officer at Firefox.

Always use incognito or private browsing mode on your browser to avoid leaving a trail on your own devices. When choosing a browser, go with Safari, Firefox or Brave, which all have robust privacy features. Make sure any options to prevent cross-site tracking are turned on, and instead of Google, use a search engine such as DuckDuckGo or Brave.

To minimize what is recorded about your browsing, use a VPN or Apple’s iCloud Private Relay, which acts like a more secure VPN. Avoid using third-party apps for searches. If you want an extra layer of protection, use Tor Browser, a tool for anonymous internet use that cloaks both your identity and your location, Rescorla said.

If you do use Google, make sure you are logged out of your account and that you have turned up the dials on all your privacy settings. Confirm any results for abortion clinics are real and not fake “pregnancy crisis” centers. If it’s a Google ad, there should be a small line above the site name that says “Provides abortions” or “Does not provide abortions.” The National Abortion Federation has a list of vetted providers on its site.

Turn off location sharing, or leave your phone behind

Some apps collect your location throughout the day and night and share it with third parties including data brokers, who sell that data to whoever wants to pay. To turn off location sharing on an Apple device, go to Settings → Privacy → Location Services and toggle the slider so that it shows gray. (Note that this will make apps that depend on location, such as Uber or maps, stop working.) On an Android device, go to Settings → Location and toggle the switch to “off.”

Unfortunately, turning off location sharing won’t stop your cell carrier from collecting your location. Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, said a Faraday bag, which blocks electromagnetic fields, could help in cases when a person wants to keep their phone on them but prevent location tracking from service providers.

To truly obscure your location, the best thing to do is leave your phone at home or turn it off completely, McKinney said. You can also use a temporary “burner” phone. Don’t add any of your accounts, connect to your home WiFi or turn on Bluetooth, she added.

Maximize your privacy settings:

To make sure your phone or social media sites are collecting as little data as possible, lock down your privacy settings. You can find a list of the biggest app and device’s options in our Privacy Reset Guide.

A guide to every privacy setting you should change now

Avoid period tracking apps

Trusting any app with sensitive medical information is a risk, especially if it’s not covered by HIPAA requirements. Each period-tracking app has different privacy practices, and understanding the nuances can be tricky. A password-protected spreadsheet or paper calendar will serve you better.

If you decide to delete your period-tracking app, consider sending a data-deletion request as well, said Alan Butler, executive director and president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Some companies only honor these requests from people in California because of the state’s privacy law, but others accept requests from anywhere.

“The state and federal government’s power to get data right now is incredibly broad,” Butler said. “We haven’t seen new limits on access to data from government in decades, which means laws … have gotten weaker as tech has evolved.”

Limit where you share health information

Your dentist and even your workout instructor may hand out forms asking whether you’re pregnant. If you’re not comfortable sharing, say so, and save that conversation for a doctor you trust.

Check-in software at your doctor’s office may have privacy holes, The Washington Post has reported. A consent form from check-in software maker Phreesia, for example, gives it permission to use your data for marketing. Select “no” on any data-sharing prompts you see.

Push your health-care and insurance providers on what they do with your information, such as the date of last period or pregnancy status. Where is it recorded and stored, is it encrypted, and how long do they keep it? Look over every document you sign to see whether you’re giving up any rights to your information, or whether you’re giving permission to share it with other parties.

Be cognizant of physical surveillance technology:

In some cases, law enforcement may pull data from license plate readers or facial recognition software systems that have been strategically set up along state borders, said Granick of the ACLU. If you’re in need of reproductive services, you may want to consider taking alternate modes of transportation vs. driving your own car, for example.

​​ “People should not give up, even though this is hard and may seem like a lot,” Granick said.

​“People should take advantage of what they can do while pushing the powers that be to do more.”

[End of Article]








The Judicial Branch: Supreme Court, including the Current Justices as well as Five Scandals by Current Justices (Newsweek 5/2/2023) Pictured below: (L) Supreme Court building and (R) Current Justices as follows:
​The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point of U.S. Constitutional or federal law.

It also has original jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases, specifically "all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party." The court holds the power of judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the Constitution.

It is also able to strike down presidential directives for violating either the Constitution or statutory law. However, it may act only within the context of a case in an area of law over which it has jurisdiction. The court may decide cases having political overtones, but has ruled that it does not have power to decide non-justiciable political questions.

Established by Article Three of the United States Constitution, the composition and procedures of the Supreme Court were initially established by the 1st Congress through the Judiciary Act of 1789. The court consists of nine justices: the chief justice of the United States and eight associate justices.

Justices have lifetime tenure, meaning they remain on the court until they die, retire, resign, or are impeached and removed from office. When a vacancy occurs, the president, with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoints a new justice.

Each justice has a single vote in deciding the cases argued before the court. When in the majority, the chief justice decides who writes the opinion of the court; otherwise, the most senior justice in the majority assigns the task of writing the opinion.

The Supreme Court receives on average about 7,000 petitions for writs of certiorari each year, but grants only 70–90.

The court meets in the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C.

​Criticism and controversies:

The Supreme Court has been the object of criticisms and controversies on a range of issues. Among them:

Democratic backsliding:
Main article: Democratic backsliding in the United States

Thomas Keck argues that the Supreme Court has rarely provided an effective check against democratic abuses, especially at five major constitutional crises throughout US History, and finds signs that the Roberts Court seems to play an even more damaging role than most of its predecessors in undermining American democracy.

Keck contends that Americans may already have permanent minority rule, but that a win for the independent state legislature theory in Moore v. Harper would confirm the need for court packing to try and save American democracy (however, the court eventually rejected the independent state legislature theory). 

Aziz Z. Huq argues that by blocking progress of democratizing institutions, increasing the disparity in wealth and power, and empowering an authoritarian white nationalist movement, that the Supreme Court has already created a "permanent minority" that is incapable of democratic defeat.

Ethics:

Ethical controversies continue to mount with revelations of justices (and their close family members) accepting expensive gifts, travel, business deals, and speaking fees without oversight or recusals from cases that present conflicts of interest. 

Spousal income and connections to cases is additionally redacted from the Justices' ethical disclosure forms while justices, such as Clarence Thomas, failed to disclose many large financial gifts including a free vacation worth $500,000. In 2016, Stephen Spaulding, the legal director at Common Cause, commented, "there are fair questions raised by some of these trips about their commitment to being impartial."

Subsequent to news reports in the summer of 2022 of undue influence through donations to the Supreme Court Historical Society, the House Committee on the Judiciary convened a hearing to determine covert activity and influence on SCOTUS members by the Faith and Action (now Faith and Liberty) group, entitled "Undue Influence: Operation Higher Court and Politicking at SCOTUS", at which the chief counsel for the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), testified to the inherent danger of wealthy activists accessing and influencing justices, noting that Supreme Court justices are not subject to the gift bans applied to lower court judges, so that justices are "accepting gifts based on whether they choose to accept them or not".

Increasing partisanship:

Unlike constitutional courts in most democracies and contrary to the ideal taught in civics classes, the U.S. Supreme Court appears to be an increasingly partisan institution.

The partisan refusal to act on the nomination of Merrick Garland, citing a presidential election that was eight months away, together with the same partisan majority expediting the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett held less than 2 months before the 2020 presidential election four years later, showed that the Senate deems the institution to be of partisan importance. 

Further evidence of partisanship can be found in the sinking confidence ratings for the Court among Independents (25%) and Democrats (13%) in the 2022 Gallup poll.

Lastly, FiveThirtyEight found the number of unanimous decisions dropped from the 20-year average of nearly 50% to nearly 30% in 2021 while party-line rulings increased from a 60-year average just above zero to a record high 21%.

Individual rights:

Court decisions have been criticized for failing to protect individual rights:
  • the Dred Scott (1857) decision upheld slavery; 
  • Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) upheld segregation under the doctrine of separate but equal;
  • Kelo v. City of New London (2005) was criticized by prominent politicians, including New Jersey governor Jon Corzine, as undermining property rights.
  • Some critics suggest the 2009 bench with a conservative majority has "become increasingly hostile to voters" by siding with Indiana's voter identification laws which tend to "disenfranchise large numbers of people without driver's licenses, especially poor and minority voters", according to one report.

Senator Al Franken criticized the court for "eroding individual rights." However, others argue that the court is too protective of some individual rights, particularly those of people accused of crimes or in detention.

For example, Chief Justice Warren Burger was an outspoken critic of the exclusionary rule, and Justice Scalia criticized the court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush for being too protective of the rights of Guantanamo detainees, on the grounds that habeas corpus was "limited" to sovereign territory.

Judicial activism:

The Supreme Court has been criticized for not keeping within Constitutional bounds by engaging in judicial activism, rather than merely interpreting law and exercising judicial restraint. Claims of judicial activism are not confined to any particular ideology. 

An often cited example of conservative judicial activism is the 1905 decision in Lochner v. New York, which has been criticized by many prominent thinkers, including Robert Bork, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice John Roberts, and which was reversed in the 1930s.

An often cited example of liberal judicial activism is Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion on the basis of the "right to privacy" inferred from the Fourteenth Amendment, a reasoning that some critics argued was circuitous, and the case was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022). Legal scholars, justices, and presidential candidates have criticized the Roe decision.

The progressive Brown v. Board of Education decision banning racial segregation in public schools has been criticized by conservatives such as Patrick Buchanan, former associate justice nominee and solicitor general Robert Bork and former presidential contender Barry Goldwater.

More recently, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was criticized for expanding upon the precedent in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978) that the First Amendment applies to corporations. 

President Abraham Lincoln warned, referring to the Dred Scott decision, that if government policy became "irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court... the people will have ceased to be their own rulers." Former justice Thurgood Marshall justified judicial activism with these words: "You do what you think is right and let the law catch up." During different historical periods, the court has leaned in different directions.

Critics from both sides complain that activist judges abandon the Constitution and substitute their own views instead. 

Critics include writers such as: 
Past presidents from both parties have attacked judicial activism, including Franklin D. Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan. Failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork wrote: "What judges have wrought is a coup d'état,– slow-moving and genteel, but a coup d'état nonetheless." 

Brian Leiter wrote that "Given the complexity of the law and the complexity involved in saying what really happened in a given dispute, all judges, and especially those on the Supreme Court, often have to exercise a quasi-legislative power," and "Supreme Court nominations are controversial because the court is a super-legislature, and because its moral and political judgments are controversial."

Judicial interference in political disputes:

Some Court decisions have been criticized for injecting the court into the political arena, and deciding questions that are the purview of the other two branches of government. The Bush v. Gore decision, in which the Supreme Court intervened in the 2000 presidential election and effectively chose George W. Bush over Al Gore, has been criticized extensively, particularly by liberals.

Another example are Court decisions on apportionment and re-districting: in Baker v. Carr, the court decided it could rule on apportionment questions; Justice Frankfurter in a "scathing dissent" argued against the court wading into so-called political questions.

Lack of accountability:

The ethics rules guiding the court's members are set and enforced by the justices, meaning the members of the court have no external checks on their behavior other than the impeachment of a justice by Congress. Chief Justice Roberts refused to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in April 2023, reasserting his desire for the Supreme Court to continue to monitor itself despite mounting ethics scandals.

Lower courts, by contrast, discipline according to the 1973 Code of Conduct for U.S. judges which is enforced by the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980. The lack of external enforcement of ethics or other conduct violations makes the Supreme Court an extreme outlier in modern organizational best-practices.

Lifetime tenure:

Critic Larry Sabato wrote: "The insularity of lifetime tenure, combined with the appointments of relatively young attorneys who give long service on the bench, produces senior judges representing the views of past generations better than views of the current day."

Sanford Levinson has been critical of justices who stayed in office despite medical deterioration based on longevity. James MacGregor Burns stated lifelong tenure has "produced a critical time lag, with the Supreme Court institutionally almost always behind the times." 

Proposals to solve these problems include term limits for justices, as proposed by Levinson and Sabato and a mandatory retirement age proposed by Richard Epstein, among others. However, others suggest lifetime tenure brings substantial benefits, such as impartiality and freedom from political pressure. Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78 wrote "nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office."

Not choosing enough cases to review:

Senator Arlen Specter said the court should "decide more cases"; on the other hand, although Justice Scalia acknowledged in a 2009 interview that the number of cases that the court heard then was smaller than when he first joined the Supreme Court, he also stated that he had not changed his standards for deciding whether to review a case, nor did he believe his colleagues had changed their standards.

He attributed the high volume of cases in the late 1980s, at least in part, to an earlier flurry of new federal legislation that was making its way through the courts.

Power excess:

This criticism is related to complaints about judicial activism. George Will wrote that the court has an "increasingly central role in American governance." It was criticized for intervening in bankruptcy proceedings regarding ailing carmaker Chrysler Corporation in 2009. 

A reporter wrote that "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's intervention in the Chrysler bankruptcy" left open the "possibility of further judicial review" but argued overall that the intervention was a proper use of Supreme Court power to check the executive branch.

Warren E. Burger, before becoming Chief Justice, argued that since the Supreme Court has such "unreviewable power", it is likely to "self-indulge itself", and unlikely to "engage in dispassionate analysis." 

Larry Sabato wrote "excessive authority has accrued to the federal courts, especially the Supreme Court."

The 2021–2022 term of the court was the first full term following the appointment of three judges by Republican president Donald Trump — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — which created a six-strong conservative majority on the court.

Subsequently, at the end of the term, the court issued a number of decisions that favored this conservative majority while significantly changing the landscape with respect to rights. These included:  ​
Several observers considered this a shift of government power into the Supreme Court, and a "judicial coup" by some members of Congress including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, urging action to reform the Supreme Court.

Secretive proceedings:
Further information: Shadow docket and List of United States Supreme Court leaks

​The court has been criticized for keeping its deliberations hidden from public view. For example, the increasing use of a 'shadow docket' facilitates the court making decisions in secret without hearing oral arguments or giving an explanation regarding its ruling. 

According to a review of Jeffrey Toobin's 2007 book The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court; "Its inner workings are difficult for reporters to cover, like a closed 'cartel', only revealing itself through 'public events and printed releases, with nothing about its inner workings.'" 

The reviewer writes: "few (reporters) dig deeply into court affairs. It all works very neatly; the only ones hurt are the American people, who know little about nine individuals with enormous power over their lives." 

A Fairleigh Dickinson University poll conducted in 2010 found that 61% of American voters agreed that televising Court hearings would "be good for democracy", and 50% of voters stated they would watch Court proceedings if they were televised.

Selection biases:
Main articles: 
The electoral college (which elects the President who nominates the justices) and the US Senate which confirms the justices, both have biases that, for example, currently favor republicans, making it likely those biases have been transferred to what was in 2018, the most conservative Supreme Court since FDR's first term.

In addition, the Federalist Society acted as a filter for judicial nominations during the Trump administration, ensuring the latest conservative justices lean even further to the right. David Litt critiques it as "an attempt to impose rigid ideological dogma on a profession once known for intellectual freedom."

State vs. federal power debate:

There has been debate throughout American history about the boundary between federal and state power.

While Framers such as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton argued in The Federalist Papers that their then-proposed Constitution would not infringe on the power of state governments, others argue that expansive federal power is good and consistent with the Framers' wishes. 

The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution explicitly grants "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The court has been criticized for giving the federal government too much power to interfere with state authority. One criticism is that it has allowed the federal government to misuse the Commerce Clause by upholding regulations and legislation which have little to do with interstate commerce, but that were enacted under the guise of regulating interstate commerce; and by voiding state legislation for allegedly interfering with interstate commerce.

For example, the Commerce Clause was used by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the Endangered Species Act, thus protecting six endemic species of insect near Austin, Texas, despite the fact that the insects had no commercial value and did not travel across state lines; the Supreme Court let that ruling stand without comment in 2005.

Chief Justice John Marshall asserted Congress's power over interstate commerce was "complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than are prescribed in the Constitution." Justice Alito said congressional authority under the Commerce Clause is "quite broad"; modern-day theorist Robert B. Reich suggests debate over the Commerce Clause continues today.

Advocates of states' rights such as constitutional scholar Kevin Gutzman have also criticized the court, saying it has misused the Fourteenth Amendment to undermine state authority. Justice Brandeis, in arguing for allowing the states to operate without federal interference, suggested that states should be laboratories of democracy. 

One critic wrote "the great majority of Supreme Court rulings of unconstitutionality involve state, not federal, law." Others see the Fourteenth Amendment as a positive force that extends "protection of those rights and guarantees to the state level." 

More recently, the issue of federal power is central in the prosecution of Gamble v. United States, which is examining the doctrine of "separate sovereigns", whereby a criminal defendant can be prosecuted by a state court and then by a federal court.

Too slow:

British constitutional scholar Adam Tomkins sees flaws in the American system of having courts (and specifically the Supreme Court) act as checks on the Executive and Legislative branches; he argues that because the courts must wait, sometimes for years, for cases to navigate their way through the system, their ability to restrain other branches is severely weakened. 

In contrast, various other countries have a dedicated constitutional court that has original jurisdiction on constitutional claims brought by persons or political institutions; for example, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, which can declare a law unconstitutional when challenged.

Too small:
Main article: Supreme Court of the United States § Size of the court

The U.S. Supreme Court is the smallest (9 justices) of any major nation and could be expanded without a constitutional amendment. Some have argued that 9 justices is too small a number to represent the perspectives of more than 300 million people, and that the number of seats on the Supreme Court should be expanded, with Jonathan Turley, advocating for 19 justices.

For more information about the Supreme Court, click on any of the following blue hyperlinks: ___________________________________________________________________________

​Five Ethics Scandals Facing Supreme Court Justices and Their Spouses (Newsweek ​BY KHALEDA RAHMAN ON 5/2/23 AT 6:31 AM EDT)

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on Supreme Court ethics reform Tuesday, following recent reports of five scandals that prompted criticism of the justices' ethical practices.

It will proceed without the participation of Chief Justice John Roberts, who declined an invitation to testify.

It comes after lawmakers last week introduced a bipartisan bill that would require the Supreme Court to create a code of conduct for its justices.
​
​Calls for an ethics code have intensified after the recent reports about the practices of justices underlined how few reporting requirements are in place and how compliance is often left to the justices.

What Scandals Have Justices Faced?

Scandal 1: Clarence Thomas' luxury trips:

A ProPublica investigation in early April revealed Justice Clarence Thomas had long accepted luxury trips nearly every year from Harlan Crow, a Republican megadonor, without reporting them on financial disclosure forms.

Thomas issued a statement saying he was not required to disclose the trips. "Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable," he said.

Scandal 2: Clarence Thomas' $100,000 property deal

ProPublica then revealed that Crow had bought three properties belonging to Thomas and his family in a deal worth more than $100,000 that Thomas never disclosed.

Scandal 3: Clarence Thomas and 2020 election cases:

Thomas also faced criticism after it was revealed that he had not recused himself from cases related to the 2020 election even though his wife, Virginia Thomas, had reached out to the Trump White House and lawmakers, urging them to overturn election results.

Scandal 4: Neil Gorsuch's property sale:

Politico last week reported that Justice Neil Gorsuch sold a property he co-owned shortly after becoming a justice.

He disclosed the sale, but omitted that the property was sold to the chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one the country's biggest law firms. Greenberg Traurig frequently has cases before the high court.

Scandal 5: John Roberts' wife working as a legal recruiter:

Earlier this year, questions were also raised about whether Roberts' wife's work as a legal recruiter raised ethics concerns for the chief justice. Jane Roberts was reportedly paid millions of dollars for placing lawyers at firms, including some with business before the Supreme Court.

​​Sen. Dick Durbin, the committee's chair, said there had been a "steady stream of revelations" regarding Supreme Court justices "falling short of ethical standards expected of other federal judges" in a letter inviting Roberts to testify before the committee on Tuesday.

Roberts declined the invitation, writing that testimony "before the Senate Judiciary Committee by the Chief Justice of the United States is exceedingly rare, as one might expect in light of separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence."

The letter to Durbin was accompanied by a "Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices" signed by all nine justices describing the ethical rules they follow about travel, gifts and outside income.

The statement said the justices "today reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States."

Durbin said he was surprised because the response from the court "suggests current law is adequate and ignores the obvious."

In a statement, he said he would proceed with the hearing, which will "review common sense proposals" to hold Supreme Court justices more accountable to ethics guidelines.

In another letter to Roberts dated April 27, Durbin said it was "noteworthy that no Justice will speak to the American people after numerous revelations have called the Court's ethical standards into question, even though sitting Justices have testified before Senate or House Committees on at least 92 occasions since 1960."

​A day earlier, Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine, introduced legislation that would require the Supreme Court to create a code of conduct and appoint an official to oversee potential conflicts and public complaints.

"The American public's confidence in the Supreme Court is at an all-time-low. Americans have made clear their concerns with the transparency—or lack thereof—coming from the Supreme Court and its justices," Murkowski said in a statement.

"The Supreme Court must demonstrate independence and fairness as they rule on the laws of the land—and any cracks in the public's confidence will have damaging repercussions for the state of our democracy."

Newsweek has contacted a Supreme Court spokesperson for comment via email.

​[End of Newsweek Article]







​
​Our Nation's Capital: Washington D.C. including its Federal BuildingsPictured: Clockwise from top right: United States Capitol, Washington Monument, the White House, Smithsonian Institution Building, Lincoln Memorial and Washington National Cathedral
​Click here for a List of Federal Buildings in Washington, D.C.

​Washington, D.C., formally the District of Columbia and commonly referred to as "Washington", "the District", or simply "D.C.", is the capital of the United States.

The signing of the Residence Act on July 16, 1790, approved the creation of a capital district located along the Potomac River on the country's East Coast. The U.S. Constitution provided for a federal district under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress and the District is therefore not a part of any state.

The states of Maryland and Virginia each donated land to form the federal district, which included the pre-existing settlements of Georgetown and Alexandria. Named in honor of President George Washington, the City of Washington was founded in 1791 to serve as the new national capital.

In 1846, Congress returned the land originally ceded by Virginia; in 1871, it created a single municipal government for the remaining portion of the District.

Washington had an estimated population of 681,170 as of July 2016. Commuters from the surrounding Maryland and Virginia suburbs raise the city's population to more than one million during the workweek. The Washington metropolitan area, of which the District is a part, has a population of over 6 million, the sixth-largest metropolitan statistical area in the country.

The centers of all three branches of the federal government of the United States are in the District, including the Congress, President, and Supreme Court.

Washington is home to many national monuments and museums, which are primarily situated on or around the National Mall. The city hosts 176 foreign embassies as well as the headquarters of many international organizations, trade unions, non-profit organizations, lobbying groups, and professional associations.

A locally elected mayor and a 13‑member council have governed the District since 1973. However, the Congress maintains supreme authority over the city and may overturn local laws. D.C. residents elect a non-voting, at-large congressional delegate to the House of Representatives, but the District has no representation in the Senate. The District receives three electoral votes in presidential elections as permitted by the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1961.

Click on any of the following blue hyperlinks for more about Washington, D.C.
​ ​






​
January 6, 2021 United States Capitol AttackPictured below: Capitol riot: What our Hill reporters and photographers saw
January 6 United States Capitol attack

​On January 6, 2021, following the defeat of U.S. President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, a mob of his supporters attacked the United States Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. 

The mob sought to keep Trump in power by preventing a joint session of Congress from counting the Electoral College votes to formalize the victory of President-elect Joe Biden. According to the House select committee that investigated the incident, the attack was the culmination of a seven-part plan by Trump to overturn the election.

​Five people died either shortly before, during, or following the event: one was shot by Capitol Police, another died of a drug overdose, and three died of natural causes including a police officer. Many people were injured, including 138 police officers. Four officers who responded to the attack died by suicide within seven months.

As of July 7, 2022, monetary damages caused by attackers exceed $2.7 million.
​
Called to action by Trump, thousands of his supporters gathered in Washington, D.C., on January 5 and 6 to support his false claim that the 2020 election had been "stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats" and to demand that Vice President Mike Pence and Congress reject Biden's victory.

Starting at noon on January 6, at a "Save America" rally on the Ellipse, Trump gave a speech in which he repeated false claims of election irregularities, and though he encouraged his supporters to march to the Capitol to peacefully make their voices heard, he said, "If you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore".

During and after his speech, thousands of attendees, some armed, walked to the Capitol, and hundreds breached police perimeters as Congress was beginning the electoral vote count.

In the days and weeks prior to January 6, the leaders of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, two militia groups, conspired to use violence to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power. On January 6, Proud Boys led the "tip of the spear" that first breached the Capitol, while a formation of Oath Keepers later breached the Rotunda.

​More than 2,000 rioters ultimately entered the building, many of whom vandalized and looted parts of it, including the offices of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D‑CA) and other members of Congress. Rioters also assaulted Capitol Police officers and reporters, and attempted to locate lawmakers to capture and harm. A gallows was erected west of the Capitol, and some rioters chanted "Hang Mike Pence" after he rejected false claims by Trump and others that the vice president could overturn the election results.

With building security breached, Capitol Police evacuated and locked down both chambers of Congress and several buildings in the Capitol Complex. Rioters occupied the empty Senate chamber while federal law enforcement officers defended the evacuated House floor.

Pipe bombs were found at both the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee headquarters, and Molotov cocktails were discovered in a vehicle near the Capitol.
​
Trump resisted sending the National Guard to quell the mob. Later that afternoon, in a Twitter video, he reasserted that the election was "fraudulent", and told his supporters to "go home in peace".

The Capitol was clear of rioters by mid-evening, and the counting of the electoral votes resumed and was completed in the early morning hours of January 7. Pence declared President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris victorious. Pressured by his cabinet, the threat of removal, and many resignations, Trump later committed to an orderly transition of power in a televised statement.

A week after the riot, the House of Representatives impeached Trump for incitement of insurrection, making him the only U.S. president to have been impeached twice. In February, after Trump had left office, the Senate voted 57–43 in favor of conviction, but as it fell short of a two-thirds majority, he was acquitted for a second time.

​Republicans in the Senate blocked a bill to create a bipartisan independent commission to investigate the attack, so instead the House approved a select committee with seven Democrats and two Republicans to investigate. The committee held nine televised public hearings on the attack in 2022, and later voted to subpoena Trump. 

​By March 2022, the Department of Justice's (DOJ) investigations had expanded to include the activities of others leading up to the attack. Ultimately, the committee recommended to the DOJ that Trump be prosecuted for: 
On August 1, 2023, following a special counsel investigation, Trump was indicted on four charges.

A significant number of participants in the attack were linked to far-right extremist groups or conspiratorial movements, including the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and Three Percenters. More than 1,100 people have been charged with federal crimes arising from the attack. As of August 2023, 632 defendants had pleaded guilty, while another 110 defendants had been convicted at trial; a total of 586 defendants have been sentenced as of July 2023. 

Numerous plotters of the attack were convicted of seditious conspiracy, including Oath Keepers leaders Stewart Rhodes and Kelly Meggs, and six of their followers, and Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and his followers Joseph Randall Biggs, Ethan Nordean, Jeremy Bertino, and Zach Rehl. The longest sentence to date related to the attack was given to Tarrio, who was sentenced to 22 years' imprisonment.


Background:
For a chronological guide, see Timeline of the January 6 United States Capitol attack.

Attempts to overturn the presidential election:
Main article: Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election

Democrat Joe Biden defeated incumbent Republican Donald Trump in the 2020 United States presidential election. Trump and other Republicans attempted to overturn the election, falsely claiming widespread voter fraud.

Within hours after the closing of the polls, while votes were still being tabulated, Trump declared victory, demanding that further counting be halted. He began a campaign to subvert the election, through legal challenges and an extralegal effort. Trump's lawyers had concluded within ten days after the election that legal challenges to the election results had no factual basis or legal merit. 

Despite those analyses, he sought to overturn the results by filing at least sixty lawsuits, including two brought to the Supreme Court. Those actions sought to nullify election certifications and to void votes that had been cast for Biden. Those challenges were all rejected by the courts for lack of evidence or the absence of legal standing.

​Trump then mounted a campaign to pressure Republican governors, secretaries of state, and state legislatures to nullify results by replacing slates of Biden electors with those declared to Trump, or by manufacturing evidence of fraud. He further demanded that lawmakers investigate ostensible election "irregularities" such as by conducting signature matches of mailed-in ballots, disregarding any prior analytic efforts.

Trump also personally made inquiries proposing the invocation of martial law to "re-run" or reverse the election and the appointment of a special counsel to find instances of fraud, despite conclusions by federal and state officials that such cases were few and isolated or non-existent. Trump ultimately undertook neither step. 

Trump repeatedly urged Vice President Mike Pence to alter the results and to stop Biden from taking office. None of those actions would have been within Pence's constitutional powers as vice president and president of the Senate. Trump repeated this call in his rally speech on the morning of January 6.

Numerous scholars, historians, political scientists, and journalists have characterized these efforts to overturn the election as an attempted self-coup by Trump and an implementation of the big lie. On July 16, 2023, Donald Trump was notified that he was officially a target in the Smith special counsel investigation.

Planning of January 6 events:

On December 18, four days after the Electoral College voted, Trump called for supporters to attend a rally before the January 6 Congressional vote count, tweeting, "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!".

On December 28, far-right activist Ali Alexander described collaboration with the Proud Boys and explained the purpose of the January 6 event was "to build momentum and pressure, and then on the day change hearts and minds of Congresspeoples [sic] who weren’t yet decided or saw everyone outside and said, 'I can't be on the other side of that mob.'"

Alexander named three Republican members of the House as allies who were planning "something big": Gosar, Biggs and Brooks. "We're the four guys who came up with a January 6 event", he said.

On December 23, 2020, Roger Stone's group Stop the Steal posted plans to occupy the Capitol with promises to "escalate" if opposed by police. By January 1, Roger Stone recorded a video for his "Stop The Steal Security Project" to raise funds "for the staging, the transportation and most importantly the security" of the event.

The event was largely bankrolled by Trump mega-donor Julie Jenkins Fancelli, the 72-year-old heiress to the Publix supermarket fortune, who budgeted $3 million for the event and spent at least $650,000.

Fancelli's funding, via conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, was used to reserve the Ellipse. With Fancelli's funding, a robocall campaign was initiated, urging people to "march to the Capitol building and call on Congress to stop the steal". Charlie Kirk, another Fancelli-funded activist, tweeted that his group had sent over eighty buses to the Capitol. Jones claimed that the Trump White House asked him to lead the march to the Capitol.

On January 2, Trump announced plans to speak at the "March to Save America" rally on January 6. On January 4, 2021, Steve Bannon described himself being part of "the bloodless coup".

Seditious conspiracy by Oath Keepers and Proud Boys:
Main article: Planning of the January 6 United States Capitol attack

​​On November 5, 2020, two days after the presidential election, Oath Keeper leaders began communicating about a "civil war". On November 9, Oath Keeper leaders held an online members-only video conference in which leader Stewart Rhodes outlined a plan to stop the transfer of power, including preparations for using force to accomplish the goal.

Oath Keepers planned to store "an arsenal" with a "Quick Reaction Force" (QRF) in nearby Alexandria, Virginia. The leaders planned to procure boat transportation so that bridge closures could not prevent their entry into D.C.

On December 19, Oath Keepers leader Kelly Meggs placed a call to Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio. On December 20, the Proud Boys leadership handpicked existing members to form a new chapter called the "Ministry of Self Defense" in charge of "national rally planning". 

That day, one leader posted a message saying, "I am assuming most of the protest will be at the capital [sic] building given what's going on inside." The Proud Boys leadership began encouraging members to attend the January 6 event. Leaders used a crowdfunding website to raise money and purchase paramilitary equipment like concealed tactical vests and radio equipment in preparation for the attack.

Chapter leadership spent the days prior to, and the morning of, January 6 planning the attack. On December 29, leaders announced plans to be "incognito" on January 6, not wearing traditional black and yellow garb. On December 30, the leadership received a document titled "1776 Returns", which called for the occupation of "crucial buildings" on January 6 and argued for supporters to "Storm the Winter Palace" in an apparent reference to an attack on the Capitol.

On January 3 and 4, Proud Boys leadership explicitly discussed "storming" the Capitol.

On January 3, Rhodes departed his home in Texas, spending $6,000 on a rifle and other firearms equipment in Texas and an addition $4,500 in Mississippi, enroute to D.C. On January 5, leaders began unloading weapons with the "QRF" in Alexandria.

Leaders drove into D.C. on a "reconnaissance mission" before returning their hotel in Virginia. On January 4, Tarrio was arrested by D.C. police in connection with a prior destruction of property charge.

Fearing that the police would access Tarrio’s messaging apps, leadership destroyed the old group chat and created a new one, with one leader opining, "Well at least they won't get our boots on ground plans because we are one step ahead of them." Tarrio was released on January 5 and ordered to leave the city. Rather than immediately comply, he traveled to an underground parking garage meeting with Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes.

The night of January 5, Proud Boys leaders divvied members into teams, passed out radios, and programmed the radios to specific channels in preparation. Orders were issued to *assemble at 10 a.m. at the Washington Monument. Leadership warned members to avoid police and not to drink in public. 

On January 6, about 100 plainclothes members assembled at the Washington Monument and were led to the Capitol to participate in the attack.

Predictions of violence:
Main article: Predictions of violence ahead of the January 6 United States Capitol attack

The weeks preceding January 6 were filled with predictions of upcoming violence by Trump's supporters. The attack was later said to be "planned in plain sight", with extensive postings on social media calling for and even planning for violence on January 6.

In response to widespread predictions of possible violence, D.C. food and lodging establishments with a history of being patronized by the Proud Boys announced temporary closures in an attempt to protect public safety and the mayor advised residents to stay away from areas near the Mall that might see violence.

Members of Congress interfaced with law enforcement to ensure preparations were being made for any upcoming violence.

Commentators had long feared that Trump might provoke violence after an electoral loss. For several weeks before January 6, there were over one million mentions of storming the Capitol on social media, including calls for violence against Congress, Pence, and police. 

Many of the posters planned for violence before the event; some discussed how to avoid police on the streets, which tools to bring to help pry open doors, and how to smuggle weapons into the city. They discussed their perceived need to attack the police.
​On December 28, 2020, a map was posted showing entrances and exits to the Capitol and the tunnels that connect it to nearby House and Senate office buildings. Perimeters were drawn in red, orange, and yellow designed to reflect their relative importance while black X's represented forces that are "ready for action" if Congress tries to certify the 2020 presidential election.

On January 1, the operator of an obscure website about tunnels under Capitol noticed a huge spike in traffic to the site, prompting him to notify the FBI of a likely upcoming attack on the building.

From December 29 to January 5, the FBI and its field offices warned of armed protests at every state capitol and reported plans by Trump supporters that included violence. On December 30, 2020, one popular comment was posted, saying, "I'm thinking it will be literal war on that day. Where we'll storm offices and physically remove and even kill all the D.C. traitors and reclaim the country." 

That comment was highlighted in a January 2 article by The Daily Beast which reported protesters were discussing bringing guns to the District, breaking into federal buildings, and attacking law enforcement. In the days leading up to the attack, several organizations, including ones that monitor online extremism, had been issuing warnings about the event.
​
On January 5, media published stories about widespread predictions of violence, and D.C. Mayor Bowser called for residents to avoid the downtown area where protesters would march. That day, members of Congress reached out to law enforcement charge with protecting the Capitol against possible upcoming violence and were assured Capitol Police were prepared.

Three days before the Capitol attack, the Capitol Police intelligence unit circulated a 12-page internal memo warning that Trump supporters see the day of the Electoral College vote count "as the last opportunity to overturn the results of the presidential election" and could use violence against "Congress itself" on that date.

Law enforcement and National Guard preparations:
Main article: Law enforcement response to the January 6 United States Capitol attack § Preparations for January 6.

​On November 9, Trump fired Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and replaced him with Christopher C. Miller as acting Secretary. In response to the firing, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director Gina Haspel privately told Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley that "we are on the way to a right-wing coup". On December 18, Miller unilaterally terminated the Department of Defense's transition to the incoming administration, falsely claiming it was a mutually-agreed pause for the holidays.
​
On January 2, Sen. Mitt Romney contacted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, predicting that reinforcements would be denied. Wrote Romney: "... a senior official at the Pentagon... reports that they are seeing very disturbing social media traffic regarding the protests planned on the 6th. There are calls to burn down your home, Mitch; to smuggle guns into DC, and to storm the Capitol. I hope that sufficient security plans are in place, but I am concerned that the instigator—the President—is the one who commands the reinforcements the DC and Capitol police might require."
​
On January 3, all ten living former defense secretaries released an open letter in which they expressed concerns about a potential military coup to overturn the election results, mentioning the recently-appointed Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller by name. That day, Trump ordered Miller to "do whatever was necessary to protect the demonstrators" on January 6.

The next day, Miller signed a memo severely limiting the ability of the D.C. National Guard to deploy without his personal permission. Since his appointment in March 2018, D.C. National Guard Commanding Major General William J. Walker had standing orders to respond to civil disturbances in the District, but on January 5, Walker received new orders from Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy forbidding him to respond to a civil disturbance without explicit prior approval from McCarthy and Miller. 

Previously, he had authority to respond without first seeking permission. After the attack, Walter described the order as "unusual", noting "It required me to seek authorization from the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Defense to essentially protect my guardsmen".
​
On January 4, D.C. Mayor Bowser announced that the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia (MPD) would lead law enforcement in the district, and would coordinate with the Capitol Police, the U.S. Park Police, and the Secret Service.

Jurisdictionally, the Metropolitan Police Department is responsible for city streets of the National Mall and Capitol area, whereas the Park Police are responsible for the Ellipse (the site of Trump's speech and rally that day), the Secret Service is responsible for the vicinity of the White House, and the Capitol Police is responsible for the Capitol complex itself.

During a meeting with a representative of the Capitol Police, the Mayor asked "Where does your perimeter start?"; At the point the individual left room, and stopped participation in the conference. The mayor later recalled "that should have been like a trigger to me. Like these people, they don't want to answer questions about their preparation."

On January 6, under "orders from leadership", the Capitol Police deployed without "less lethal" arms such as sting grenades. Department riot shields had been improperly stored, causing them to shatter upon impact.


Trump supporters gather in D.C.

​On January 5, several events related to overturning the election occurred in or around the National Mall in Washington, D.C., at places like the Freedom Plaza, the North Inner Gravel Walkway between 13th and 14th Streets, Area 9 across from the Russell Senate Office Building, and near the United States Supreme Court. At least ten people were arrested, several on weapons charges, on the night of January 5 and into the morning of January 6.

Ray Epps, an individual with history in the Arizona Oath Keepers, was filmed during two street gatherings on January 5 urging people to go into the Capitol the next day, "peacefully", he said at one of the gatherings. Epps was filmed on January 6 telling people to "go to the Capitol." Epps had texted his nephew that he was "orchestrating" the flow into the Capitol building. Epps later claimed that he had been boasting about "directing" people towards the Capitol.

From 1:00 to 5:00 pm on January 5, a series of Trump rallies were held at the Freedom Plaza. Notable speakers included: 
Both Flynn and Stone had received presidential pardon in the prior weeks. On December 8, Trump had pardoned retired U S. Army General Michael Flynn who had pleaded guilty to "willfully and knowingly" making false statements to the FBI about communications with the Russian ambassador.

Flynn, a prominent QAnon proponent, participated in the D.C. events on January 5, while his brother, U.S. Army General Charles Flynn, would participate in a conference call on January 6 denying permission to deploy the National Guard after the breach of the Capitol.

​On December 23, Trump had pardoned Roger Stone, who had been found guilty at trial of witness tampering, making false statements to Congress, and obstruction. Stone, who had longtime ties to both Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, employed Oath Keepers as security on January 5. Stone's Oath-Keeper driver was later convicted of seditious conspiracy for his role in plotting and executing the following day's attack.

January 5 meetings:

Trump's closest allies, including:  met at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., on the evening of January 5. Tuberville has since said that he did not attend the meeting, despite having been photographed in the hotel's lobby.

According to Charles Herbster, who said he attended the meeting himself, attendees included Tuberville, Adam Piper and Peter Navarro.

Daniel Beck wrote that "Fifteen of us spent the evening with the following:
Herbster claimed to be standing "in the private residence of the President at Trump International with the following patriots who are joining me in a battle for justice and truth". He added David Bossie to the list of attendees.

On January 5, after Vice President Mike Pence refused to participate in the fake electors plot, Trump warned he would have to publicly criticize him. This prompted Pence's chief of staff to become concerned for the Pence's safety, leading him to alert Pence's Secret Service detail to the perceived threat. At 3:23 a.m. on the morning of January 6, QAnon leader Ron Watkins posted a tweet accusing Pence of orchestrating a coup against Trump and linked to a blog post which called for "the immediate arrest of [Pence], for treason."

Bombs placed

​​At 7:40 p.m. on January 5, someone wearing a gray hooded sweatshirt, a mask, and Nike Air Max Speed Turf sneakers was filmed carrying a bag through a residential neighborhood on South Capitol Street. At 7:52 p.m., the individual was recorded sitting on a bench outside the DNC; the next day, a pipe bomb was discovered there, placed under a bush. In the footage, the suspect appears to zip a bag, stand and walk away.

At 8:14, they were filmed in an alley near the RNC, where a second pipe bomb was found the following day. They placed both bombs within a few blocks of the Capitol. 

As of 2023, nearing the 2-year-anniversary since the events, the overall reward price has been upped to $500,000. No suspects have been named in the incident as of September 2023.

January 6 Trump rally:

​The "Save America" rally (or "March to Save America", promoted as a "Save America March") took place on January 6 in the Ellipse within the National Mall just south of the White House. The permit granted to Women for America First showed their first amendment rally "March for Trump" with speeches running from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., and an additional hour for the conclusion of the rally and dispersal of participants.

Trump supporters gathered on the Ellipse to hear speeches from Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and others, such as Chapman University School of Law professor John C. Eastman, who spoke, at least in part, based on his memorandums, which have been described as an instruction manual for a coup d'état. 

In a court filing in February, a member of the Oath Keepers claimed she had acted as "security" at the rally, and was provided with a "VIP pass to the rally where she met with Secret Service agents".

The U.S. Secret Service denied that any private citizens had coordinated with it to provide security on January 6. 

On February 22, she changed her story and said she interacted with the Secret Service only as she passed through the security check before the rally.

Mo Brooks (R-AL) was a featured speaker at the rally and spoke around 9 a.m., where he said, "Today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass". And later, "Are you willing to do what it takes to fight for America? Louder! Will you fight for America?"

Representative Madison Cawthorn (R–NC) said, "This crowd has some fight". Amy Kremer told attendees, "it is up to you and I to save this Republic" and called on them to "keep up the fight". 

Trump's sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, along with Eric's wife Lara Trump, also spoke, naming and verbally attacking Republican congressmen and senators who were not supporting the effort to challenge the Electoral College vote, and promising to campaign against them in future primary elections. 

Donald Jr. said of Republican lawmakers, "If you're gonna be the zero and not the hero, we're coming for you".

Rudy Giuliani repeated conspiracy theories that voting machines used in the election were "crooked" and at 10:50 called for "trial by combat". Eastman asserted that balloting machines contained "secret folders" that altered voting results. 

At 10:58, a Proud Boys contingent left the rally and marched toward the Capitol Building.

On January 6, the "Wild Protest" was organized by Stop The Steal and took place in Area 8, across from the Russell Senate Office Building. On January 6, the "Freedom Rally" was organized by Virginia Freedom Keepers, Latinos for Trump, and United Medical Freedom Super PAC at 300 First Street NE, across from the Russell Senate Office Building.

Trump's knowledge of weapons in the crowd:

During the rally, Trump knew some of his supporters were armed and demanded that they be allowed to enter the rally, and later instructed the crowd to march on the US Capitol. In a December 21, 2021, statement, Trump falsely called the attack a "completely unarmed protest".

The Department of Justice said in a January 2022 official statement that over 75 people had been charged, in relation to the attack, with entering a restricted area with "a dangerous or deadly weapon", including some armed with guns, stun guns, knives, batons, baseball bats, axes, and chemical sprays. 

According to testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a Secret Service official had warned Trump that protestors were carrying weapons, but Trump wanted the magnetometers used to detect metallic weapons removed so armed supporters could enter the rally. According to Hutchinson, when warned, Trump said: "I don't fucking care that they have weapons, they're not here to hurt me. They're not here to hurt me. Take the fucking mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here, let the people in and take the mags away."

Trump's speech:

Starting at 11:58, from behind a bulletproof shield, President Trump gave a speech, declaring that he would "never concede" the election, criticized the media, and called for Pence to overturn the election results, something outside Pence's constitutional power.

His speech contained many falsehoods and misrepresentations that inflamed the crowd. Trump did not overtly call on his supporters to use violence or enter the Capitol, but his speech was filled with violent imagery and Trump suggested that his supporters had the power to prevent Biden from taking office. The same afternoon, Pence released a letter to Congress in which he said he could not challenge Biden's victory.

Although the initial plan for the rally called for people to remain at the Ellipse until the counting of electoral slates was complete, the White House said they should march to the Capitol, as Trump repeatedly urged during his speech. 

Trump called for his supporters to "walk down to the Capitol" to "cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them." He told the crowd that he would be with them, but he ultimately did not go to the Capitol.

As to counting Biden's electoral votes, Trump said, "We can't let that happen" and suggested Biden would be an "illegitimate president". Referring to the day of the elections, Trump said, "most people would stand there at 9:00 in the evening and say, 'I want to thank you very much,' and they go off to some other life, but I said, 'Something's wrong here. Something's really wrong. [It] can't have happened.' And we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don't fight like Hell, you're not going to have a country anymore"

Trump said the protesters would be "going to the Capitol and we're going to try and give [Republicans] the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country". Trump also said, "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated".

Trump denounced Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), saying, "We've got to get rid of the weak Congresspeople, the ones that aren't any good, the Liz Cheneys of the world". 

​He called upon his supporters to "fight much harder" against "bad people"; told the crowd that "you are allowed to go by very different rules," said that his supporters were "not going to take it any longer"; framed the moment as the last stand, suggested that Pence and other Republican officials put themselves in danger by accepting Biden's victory; and told the crowd he would march with them to the Capitol, but was prevented from doing so by his security detail.

In addition to the twenty times he used the term "fight," Trump once used the term "peacefully," saying, "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard".

During Trump's speech, his supporters chanted:
  • "Take the Capitol,"
  • "Taking the Capitol right now,"
  • "Invade the Capitol,"
  • "Storm the Capitol"
  • and "Fight for Trump".

Before Trump had finished speaking at 1:12 p.m., Proud Boys had begun their attack on the capitol and breached the outer perimeter of the capitol grounds; two pipe bombs had been discovered nearby.


Attack on the Capitol:

Just before the Proud Boys attacked the Capitol, pipe bombs were discovered near the complex. Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and other attackers besieged and ultimately breached the Capitol. Members of the Congress barricaded themselves in the chamber, and one attacker was fatally shot by police while attempting to breach a barricade.
​
After officials at the Pentagon delayed deployment of the National Guard citing concerns about optics, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser requested assistance from the Governor of Virginia. By 3:15, Virginia State Police began arriving in D.C. After Vice President Pence and the Congress were evacuated to secure locations, law enforcement cleared and secured the Capitol.
Proud Boys march to Capitol as mob assembles

At 10:30, over a hundred Proud Boys left Washington Monument, led by Ethan Nordean and Joe Biggs. By 11:52, the group had reached the Capitol and proceeded to walk around the building before doubling back to the west side, allowing them to assess defenses of the building and look for weaknesses.
​
Enroute, comments from one of the Proud Boys served as an early indicator of a plan to attack the Capitol, according to a documentary filmmaker who was on scene:

There's only one moment where that – the sort of facade of marching and protesting might have fallen, which is there was a – one of the Proud Boys called Milkshake and Eddie Block on his livestream catches Milkshake saying, well, let's go storm the Capitol with Nordean – Rufio – one of the leaders of the Proud Boys saying, you could keep that quiet, please, Milkshake. And then we continued on marching.

Around 12:30, a crowd of about 300 built up east of the Capitol. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), a leader of the group of lawmakers who vowed to challenge the Electoral College vote, greeted these protesters with a raised fist as he passed by on his way to the Congress joint session in the early afternoon.

At 12:52, a group of Oath Keepers wearing black hoodies with prominent logos left the rally at the Ellipse and changed into Army Combat Uniforms, with helmets, on their way to the Capitol.

Shortly before 12:53, Nordean and Biggs marched the group of 200–300 Proud Boys to a barricade on the west side of the Capitol grounds near the Peace Monument. Biggs used a megaphone to lead the crowd in chants.

Bombs discovered near Capitol ComplexThis section is an excerpt from Law enforcement response to the January 6 United States Capitol attack § Bombs discovered near Capitol Complex.

​Around 12:45 p.m., a bomb was discovered next to a building containing Republican National Committee (RNC) offices by a woman using the shared alleyway to access her apartment building's laundry room. She alerted RNC security, which investigated and summoned law enforcement; U.S. Capitol Police, FBI agents and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) all responded to the RNC bomb.

About thirty minutes later, while officers were still responding at the RNC, they were informed a second pipe bomb had been discovered under a bush at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters. Vice President-elect Kamala Harris was inside the DNC headquarters at the time the pipe bomb was discovered. 

Capitol Police began investigating the DNC pipe bomb at 1:07 p.m., and Harris was evacuated at approximately 1:14 p.m. The devices were of a similar design – about one foot (30 cm) in length. They were safely detonated by bomb squads; the pipe bomb at the RNC was neutralized at 3:33 p.m. and the pipe bomb at the DNC was neutralized at 4:36 p.m., according to a Capitol Police timeline. The bombs were fully functional and constructed of galvanized steel pipes, homemade black powder, and kitchen timers. The FBI stated that the bombs "were viable and could have been detonated, resulting in serious injury or death".
​
Sund told The Washington Post on January 10 that he suspected the pipe bombs were intentionally placed to draw police away from the Capitol; Representative Tim Ryan (D–Ohio) echoed the sentiment in a virtual news conference on January 11, saying, "[W]e do believe there was some level of coordination ... because of the pipe bombs ... that immediately drew attention away from the breach that was happening". 

​The Inspector General of the Capitol Police later concluded, "If those pipe bombs were intended to be diversion... it worked". As the mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol, the discovery of the pipe bombs diverted a large number of already-outnumbered law enforcement officers from the Capitol. Capitol Police Inspector General Michael Bolton testified before Congress that "the bombs drew three teams to investigate" and left only one squad at the Capitol. 

Attack begins near Peace Monument, led by Proud Boys

​The Proud Boys contingent reached the west perimeter of the Capitol grounds, protected only by a sparse line of police in front of a temporary fence. Other Trump supporters arrived, forming a growing crowd. The Proud Boys tactically coordinated their attacks "from the first moment of violence to multiple breaches of the Capitol while leaving the impression that it was just ordinary protesters leading the charge". 

Proud Boys targeted an access point and began to rile up the previously-peaceful crowd. In a "tipping point" moment, a man later identified Ryan Samsel approached Joe Biggs and talked with him, even embracing him. Samsel later told the FBI that Biggs "encouraged him to push at the barricades and that when he hesitated, the Proud Boys leader flashed a gun, questioned his manhood and repeated his demand to move upfront and challenge the police.", according to The New York Times. 

Proud Boy Dominic Pezzola recalled seeing Biggs flash a handgun and goading Samsel, telling him to "defend his manhood" by attacking the police line, but later tried to retract this statement. As soon as that exchange ended, Samsel became the first to violently attack Capitol Police.

Capitol police officer Caroline Edwards described the attack: "Ms. Edwards described how a Proud Boys leader named Joseph Biggs encouraged another man to approach the bike rack barricade where she was posted. That man, Ryan Samsel, she said, pushed the bike rack over, causing her to hit her head and lose consciousness. But before she blacked out, Ms. Edwards recalled seeing "a war scene" playing out in front of her. Police officers were bleeding and throwing up, she recalled. "It was carnage," she said. "It was chaos."

Video showed Officer Edwards being pushed back behind a bicycle rack as Proud Boys pushed barricades towards her, knocking her off her feet and causing her to hit her head on the concrete steps.

​Proud Boys led the charge toward the capitol to the next police line. The Proud Boys repeatedly used the same set of tactics: identifying access points to the building, riling up other protesters and sometimes directly joining in the violence. When met with resistance, leaders of the group reassessed, and teams of Proud Boys targeted new entry points to the Capitol.
​
Around 1:00 p.m., hundreds of Trump supporters clashed with a second thin line of officers and pushed through barriers erected along the perimeter of the Capitol. The crowd swept past barriers and officers, with some members of the mob spraying officers with chemical agents or hitting them with lead pipes.

Many rioters walked up the external stairways, while some resorted to ropes and makeshift ladders. Police blocked the entrance to a tunnel at the lower west terrace where rioters waged a three-hour fight to enter. To gain access to the Capitol, several rioters scaled the west wall. 

Representative Zoe Lofgren (D–CA), aware that rioters had reached the Capitol steps, could not reach Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund by phone; House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul D. Irving told Lofgren the doors to the Capitol were locked and "nobody can get in".

Telephone logs released by USCP show that Sund had been coordinating additional resources from various agencies. Sund's first call was to the D.C. Metropolitan Police, who arrived within 15 minutes. Sund called Irving and Stenger at 12:58 and asked them for an emergency declaration required to call in the National Guard; they both told Sund they would "run it up the chain", but formal approval to request the Guard was witheld for over an hour later.

Shortly after his speech concluded at 1:00 p.m., Trump ordered his Secret Service detail to drive him to the Capitol. When they refused, Trump reportedly assaulted his Secret Service driver, lunging for the man's throat.

Around 1:12 p.m, reinforcements from the MPD, equipped with crowd control gear, arrived on the lower west terrace. From 1:25 to 1:28, three different groups of Proud Boys leaders were recorded marching in stack formations away from the newly-reinforced police line. 

After about fifteen minutes of observing, the Proud Boys re-entered the attack, targeting two new access points that were poorly defended. Ronald Loehrke and other Proud Boys led a contingent to the east side of the Capitol; Once there, Proud Boys again used distraction and teamwork to remove barricades, prompting the previously-peaceful crowd on the east side to overrun barriers along the entire police line.

Meanwhile, on the west side, Joe Biggs led a team of Proud Boys that targeted the stairs covered by a temporary scaffolding. Within two minutes of Bigg's arrival, a team of over a dozen Proud Boys approached the entrance to the scaffolding and attacked police. Proud Boy Daniel "Milkshake" Scott led the charge, and a 20-minute battle for the scaffolding ensued.

At 1:50 p.m., the on-scene MPD incident commander declared a riot. At 1:58, Capitol Police officers removed a barricade on the northeast side of the Capitol allowing hundreds of protestors to stream onto the grounds.
Attackers on west terrace breach Senate Wing hallway
Just before 2:00 p.m., attackers reached the doors and windows of the Capitol and began attempts to break in. The Los Angeles Times observed that "whether by sheer luck, real-time trial and error, or advance knowledge", the first attackers to break through the police line onto the upper west terrace ran past 15 reinforced windows, "making a beeline" for the recessed area near the Senate where two unreinforced windows and two doors with unreinforced glass were the only protection from attack.

At 2:11, Proud Boy leader Dominic Pezzola used a stolen police riot shield to smash one of those un-reinforced windows on the west side of the Capitol, breaching it. By 2:13, the Capitol was officially breached. Although most of the Capitol's windows had been reinforced, attackers targeted those that remained as single-pane glass and could be broken easily. Joe Biggs and other Proud Boy leaders entered the Capitol by 2:14. A news crew from British broadcaster ITV followed the rioters into the Capitol, the only broadcaster to do so.
​
At 2:13, Vice President Pence was removed from the Senate chamber by his lead Secret Service agent, Tim Giebels, who brought him to a nearby office about 100 feet from the landing. Pence's wife Karen Pence, daughter Charlotte Pence Bond, and brother Greg Pence (a member of the House; R–IN) were in the Capitol at the time it was attacked. 

As Pence and his family were being escorted from the Senate chamber to a nearby hideaway, they came within a minute of being visible to rioters on a staircase only 100 feet (30 m) away.

Unaccompanied by other officers, Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman confronted the mob. He has been cited for heroism in baiting and diverting the rioters away from the Senate chamber in the minutes before the chamber could be safely evacuated. As the crowd of rioters reached a landing from which there was an unimpeded path to the chamber, Goodman pushed the lead attacker, Doug Jensen, and then deliberately retreated away from the chamber, enticing the crowd to chase him in another direction. One media report described his actions as follows: In short, he tricked them, willingly becoming the rabbit to their wolf pack, pulling them away from the chambers where armed officers were waiting, avoiding tragedy and saving lives. Lives which include their own.

Those present at the time of the event, including Democratic and Republican legislators and members of the press, praised Goodman for his quick thinking and brave actions. Republican Senator Ben Sasse credited Goodman with having "single-handedly prevented untold bloodshed".

Goodman's actions were captured in video footage taken by HuffPost reporter Igor Bobic. Bobic's footage of Goodman went viral on the internet, receiving more than 10 million views. A second video of Goodman's confrontation with the crowd was published by ProPublica on January 15. Goodman's actions have been credited with saving the lives of the Senate. Goodman was later awarded the Congressional Gold Medal and Presidential Citizens Medal.

Evacuation of leadership amid Capitol lockdown

​​The Senate was gaveled into recess, and the doors were locked at 2:15. A minute later, the rioters reached the gallery outside the chamber. Banging could be heard from outside as rioters attempted to breach the doors. Meanwhile, in the House chamber, Speaker Pelosi was escorted out of the chamber. The House was gaveled into recess, but would resume a few minutes later.
​
A police officer carrying a semi-automatic weapon appeared on the floor and stood between then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and then-Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT) exasperatedly threw up his hands and directly criticized several fellow Republicans who were challenging President-elect Biden's electoral votes, yelling to them, "This is what you've gotten, guys". 

Several members of Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough's staff carried the boxes of Electoral College votes and documentation out of the chamber to hidden safe rooms within the building.
​
​At 2:24, Trump tweeted that Pence "didn't have the courage to do what should have been done". Later, Trump followers on far-right social media called for Pence to be hunted down, and the mob began chanting, "Where is Pence?" and "Find Mike Pence!"

Outside, the mob chanted, "Hang Mike Pence!", which some crowds continued to chant as they stormed the Capitol;  at least three rioters were overheard by a reporter saying they wanted to find Pence and execute him as a "traitor" by hanging him from a tree outside the building. One official recalled that: "The members of the [Vice President's Secret Service detail] at this time were starting to fear for their own lives... they're screaming and saying things like 'say goodbye to the family'." 

According to witnesses, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows told coworkers that Trump complained about Pence being escorted to safety and then stated something suggesting that Pence should be hanged.

​At 2:26, Pence's detail evacuated him and his family from their hideaway near the Senate downstairs towards a more secure location. After his evacuation, Pence's Secret Service detail wanted to move him away from the Capitol building, but Pence refused to get in the car. Addressing the agent in charge of his detail Tim Giebels, Pence said, "I trust you, Tim, but you're not driving the car."
​
All buildings in the complex were subsequently locked down, with no entry or exit from the buildings allowed. Capitol staff were asked to shelter in place; those outside were advised to "seek cover". As the mob roamed the Capitol, lawmakers, aides, and staff took shelter in offices and closets. Aides to Mitch McConnell, barricaded in a room just off a hallway, heard a rioter outside the door "praying loudly", asking for "the evil of Congress [to] be brought to an end". The rioters entered and ransacked the office of the Senate Parliamentarian.
​
With senators still in the chamber, Trump called Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and told him to do more to block the counting of Biden's electoral votes, but the call had to be cut off when the Senate chamber was evacuated at 2:30. 

​After evacuation, the mob briefly took control of the chamber, with some armed men carrying plastic handcuffs and others posing with raised fists on the Senate dais Pence had left minutes earlier. Staff and reporters inside the building were taken by secure elevators to the basement and then to an underground bunker constructed following the attempted attack on the Capitol in 2001. Evacuees were redirected while en route after the bunker was also infiltrated by the mob.

Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate Michael C. Stenger accompanied a group of senators including Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) to a secure location in a Senate office building. Once safe, the lawmakers were "furious" with Stenger; Graham asked him, "How does this happen? How does this happen?" and added that they "[are] not going to be run out by a mob".

Amid the security concerns, Representative Dean Phillips (D–MN) yelled, "This is because of you!" at his Republican colleagues. The House resumed debate around 2:25. After Gosar finished speaking at 2:30, the House went into recess again after rioters had entered the House wing and were attempting to enter the Speaker's Lobby just outside the chamber.

Lawmakers were still inside and being evacuated, with Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, and a few others taken to a secure location. With violence breaking out, Capitol security advised members of Congress to take cover. Members of Congress inside the House chamber were told to don gas masks as law enforcement began using tear gas within the building.
​
ABC News reported that shots were fired within the Capitol. An armed standoff took place at the front door of the chamber of the House of Representatives: as the mob attempted to break in, federal law enforcement officers drew their guns inside and pointed them toward the chamber doors, which were barricaded with furniture. In a stairway, one officer fired a shot at a man coming toward him. 

Photographer Erin Schaff said that, from the Capitol Rotunda, she ran upstairs, where rioters grabbed her press badge. Police found her, and because her press pass had been stolen, held her at gunpoint before colleagues intervened.

The chief of staff for Representative Ayanna Pressley (D–MA) claimed that when the congresswoman and staff barricaded themselves in her office and attempted to call for help with duress buttons that they had previously used during safety drills, "[e]very panic button in my office had been torn out – the whole unit". 

Subsequently, a House Administration Committee emailed Greg Sargent of The Washington Post claiming the missing buttons were likely due to a "clerical screw-up" resulting from Pressley's swapping offices. Representative Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) tweeted that there were no duress buttons in his office, but acknowledged he was only three days into his term and they were installed a week later.

Multiple rioters, using the cameras on their cell phones, documented themselves occupying the Capitol and the offices of various representatives, vandalizing the offices of Speaker Pelosi, accessing secure computers, and stealing a laptop.

Oath Keepers arrive and breach Rotunda

​Shortly after 2:00, Oath Keeper leader Stewart Rhodes arrived at the restricted Capitol grounds. At 2:30, a team of Oath Keepers ("Stack One") clad in paramilitary clothing marched in a stack formation up the east steps of the Capitol to join the mob already besieging the Capitol. 

​At 2:38, those doors to the Capitol Rotunda were breached, "Stack One" entered the building alongside other attackers. A second group ("Stack Two") breached the Capitol through those same doors at 3:15. Throughout the attack, Oath Keepers maintained a "Quick reaction Force" ready to deliver an arsenal to the group if called upon.

Meanwhile, also at 2:38, Proud Boy founder Enrique Tarrio made a public social media post writing, "Don't fucking leave." In response to a member who asked "Are we a militia yet?", Tarrio replied, "Yep... Make no mistake... We did this..."

QAnon follower killed by police while attempting to breach Speaker's Lobby:
Main article: Killing of Ashli Babbitt

At 2:44 p.m., law enforcement was trying to "defend two fronts" to the House Chamber, and "a lot of members [of Congress] and staff that were in danger at the time". While some lawmakers remained trapped in the House balcony, House members and staff from the floor were being evacuated by Capitol Police, protected from the attackers by a barricaded door with glass windows.

As lawmakers evacuated, an attacker smashed a glass window beside the barricaded door. Lieutenant Michael Byrd aimed his weapon, prompting attackers to repeatedly warn "he's got a gun". Police and Secret Service warned "'Get back! Get down! Get out of the way!'. An attacker, wearing a Trump flag as a cape, began to climb through the shattered window, prompting Lt. Byrd to fire a single shot, hitting the attacker in the shoulder.

Mob members immediately began to leave the scene, making room for a Capitol Police emergency response team to administer aid. The attacker, later identified as 35-year-old Ashli Babbitt, had entered the Capitol building through the breach on the upper west terrace. She was evacuated to Washington Hospital Center where she later died of her injury. The shooting was recorded on several cameras, and footage was widely circulated.

Attack on the Tunnel

​​Around 3:15, MPD officer Daniel Hodges was crushed in a door while defending the Capitol tunnel from attackers; One of his attackers was sentenced to 7.5 years in prison.
]
At 3:21, MPD Officer Michael Fanone was pulled into the mob and assaulted—dragged down the Capitol steps, beaten with pipes, stunned with a Taser, sprayed with chemical irritants, and threatened with his own sidearm. Fanone was carried unconscious back into the tunnel. 

Fanone suffered burns, a heart attack, traumatic brain injuries, and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result. One of the men who attacked Fanone with a stun gun was sentenced to 12.5 years in prison.
​
By 3:39 p.m., fully-equipped riot officers from Virginia had arrived at the Capitol and began defending the tunnel.Virginia forces deployed with flashbang munitions which they used to clear attackers.

Police clear Capitol and Congress reconvened

Around 3:15, MPD officer Daniel Hodges was crushed in a door while defending the Capitol tunnel from attackers; One of his attackers was sentenced to 7.5 years in prison.

At 3:21, MPD Officer Michael Fanone was:
  • pulled into the mob and assaulted
  • dragged down the Capitol steps,
  • beaten with pipes,
  • stunned with a Taser, sprayed with chemical irritants,
  • and threatened with his own sidearm. 

Fanone was carried unconscious back into the tunnel. 
One of the men who attacked Fanone with a stun gun was sentenced to 12.5 years in prison.

By 3:39 p.m., fully-equipped riot officers from Virginia had arrived at the Capitol and began defending the tunnel. Virginia forces deployed with flashbang munitions which they used to clear attackers.

Police clear Capitol and Congress reconvened

​​A combined force of Capitol Police and Metropolitian Police began a joint operaction to clear the Capitol.

By 2:49, the Crypt was cleared, and mob outside the Speaker's Lobby was cleared by 2:57.

At 3:25, law enforcement including a line of MPD officers in full riotgear proceeded to clear the Rotunda and by 3:40, rioters had mostly been pushed out onto West Plaza.

At 4:22 p.m., Trump issued a video message to supporters on social media, finally telling them to "go home".

At 5:08, Army senior leaders relayed to Major General Walker the Secretary of Defense's permission to deploy the DCNG to the Capitol; The first contingent of 155 Guard members, dressed in riot gear, began arriving at the Capitol at 5:20. 

By 6 p.m., the building was cleared of rioters, and bomb squads swept the Capitol.
At 8:06 p.m., Pence called the Senate back into session, and at 9 p.m., Pelosi did the same in the House. After debating and voting down two objections, Congress voted to confirm Biden's electoral college win at 3:24 a.m.


Official responses during the attack:

Trump's conduct:
Trump was in the West Wing of the White House at the time of the attack. He was "initially pleased" and refused to intercede when his supporters breached the Capitol. Staffers reported that Trump had been "impossible to talk to throughout the day". 

Concerned that Trump may have committed treason through his actions, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone reportedly advised administration officials to avoid contact with Trump and ignore any illegal orders that could further incite the attack to limit their prosecutorial liability under the Sedition Act of 1918.

Shortly after 2:00 p.m. EST, as the riot was ongoing and after Senators had been evacuated, Trump placed calls to Republican senators (first Mike Lee of Utah, then Tommy Tuberville of Alabama), asking them to make more objections to the counting of the electoral votes to try to overturn the election. 

Pence was evacuated by the Secret Service from the Senate chamber around 2:13. At 2:47 p.m., as his supporters violently clashed with police at the Capitol, Trump tweeted, "Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!". 

The Washington Post later reported that Trump did not want to include the words "stay peaceful".

During the riot, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows received messages from Donald Trump Jr., as well as Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Brian Kilmeade, urging him to tell Trump to condemn the mayhem at the risk of his reputation. 

By 3:10, pressure was building on Trump to condemn supporters engaged in the riots. By 3:25, Trump tweeted, "I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue", but he refused to call upon the crowd to disperse. By 3:40, several congressional Republicans called upon Trump to more specifically condemn violence and to tell his supporters to end the occupation of the Capitol.

At some point on January 6, Trump formally withdrew his nomination of Acting DHS secretary Chad Wolf, transmitting his withdrawal to the Senate.
​
By 3:50 p.m., White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the National Guard and "other federal protective services" had been deployed. At 4:06 p.m. on national television, President-elect Biden called for President Trump to end the riot.

At 4:22 p.m., Trump issued a video message on social media that Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube later took down. In it, he repeated his claims of electoral fraud, praised his supporters and told them to "go home". 

At 6:25 p.m., Trump tweeted: "These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long" and then issued a call: "Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!". 

At 7:00, Rudy Giuliani placed a second call to Lee's number and left a voicemail intended for Tuberville urging him to make more objections to the electoral votes as part of a bid "to try to just slow it down".

In a televised January 6 Attack congressional hearing on June 9, 2022,

Congresspersons Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney stated that Trump did nothing to stop the attack despite numerous urgent requests that he intervene. They described Trump's inaction as a "dereliction of duty". Cheney said Trump had attempted to overturn a free and fair democratic election by promoting a seven-part conspiracy.

According to Representative Thompson, "Jan. 6 was the culmination of an attempted coup, a brazen attempt, as one rioter put it shortly after Jan. 6, to overthrow the government ... The violence was no accident. It represents Trump's last stand, most desperate chance to halt the transfer of power."

Trump, according to the committee, "lied to the American people, ignored all evidence refuting his false fraud claims, pressured state and federal officials to throw out election results favoring his challenger, encouraged a violent mob to storm the Capitol and even signaled support for the execution of his own vice president".

After the June 9 hearing, Congressman Tom Rice (R) reiterated his long held view of Trump's conduct saying, "He watched it happen. He reveled in it. And he took no action to stop it. I think he had a duty to try to stop it, and he failed in that duty."

Congressional conduct:

During the riots, Representative Lauren Boebert (R-CO) posted information about the police response and the location of members on Twitter, including the fact that Speaker Pelosi had been taken out of the chamber, for which she has faced calls to resign for endangering members. 

Boebert responded that she was not sharing private information since Pelosi's removal was also broadcast on TV.

Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) left the congressional safe room for fear of other members there "who incited the mob in the first place".

While sheltering for hours in the "safe room" – a cramped, windowless room where people sat within arms' length of each other – some Republican Congress members refused to wear face masks, even when their Democratic colleagues begged them to do so. During the following week, three Democratic members tested positive for COVID-19 in what an environmental health expert described as a "superspreader" event.

Capitol Police leadership:
Main article: Law enforcement response to the January 6 United States Capitol attack

Capitol Police leadership had not planned for a riot or attack, and on January 6, under "orders from leadership", the force deployed without riot gear, shields, batons, or "less lethal" arms such as sting grenades. Department riot shields had been improperly stored, causing them to shatter upon impact. Hundreds more Captiol Police could have been used, but they were not.
​
Concerned about the approaching mob, Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA) called Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who was not on Capitol grounds but at the police department's headquarters. When asked what the Capitol Police was doing to stop the rioters, Sund told Waters, "We're doing the best we can" and then hung up on her. It was not until 2:10 p.m. that the Capitol Police board granted Chief Sund permission to formally request deployment of the Guard.

​In a February 2021 confidence vote organized by the U.S. Capitol Police Labor Committee, the union representing Capitol Police officers, 92 percent voted that they had no confidence in leadership, writing: "Our leaders did not properly plan for the protest nor prepare officers for what they were about to face. This despite the fact they knew days before that the protest had the potential to turn violent. We still have no answers why leadership failed to inform or equip us for what was coming on January 6th."

Department of Defense leadership

On January 3, Miller had been ordered by Trump to "do whatever was necessary to protect the demonstrators" on January 6. The following day, Miller issued orders which prohibited deploying D.C. Guard members with weapons, helmets, body armor or riot control agents without his personal approval. 

Prior to the attack Trump had floated the idea with his staff of deploying 10,000 National Guardsmen, though not to protect the Capitol, but rather "to protect him and his supporters from any supposed threats by left-wing counterprotesters".

At 1:34 p.m., D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser had a telephone call with Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy in which she requested they deploy the Guard. At 2:10 p.m., the Capitol Police board granted chief Sund permission to formally request deployment of the Guard.

At 2:26 p.m., D.C.'s homeland security director Chris Rodriquez coordinated a conference call with Mayor Bowser, the chiefs of the Capitol Police (Sund) and Metropolitan Police (Contee), and DCNG Maj. Gen. Walker.

As the DCNG does not report to a governor, but to the President, Maj. Gen. Walker patched in the Office of the Secretary of the Army, noting that he would need Pentagon authorization to deploy. Lt. Gen. Walter E. Piatt, director of the Army Staff, noted that the Pentagon needed Capitol Police authorization to step onto Capitol grounds.

Metro Police Chief Robert Contee asked for clarification from Capitol Police Chief Sund: "Steve, are you requesting National Guard assistance at the Capitol?" to which Chief Sund replied, "I am making urgent, urgent, immediate request for National Guard assistance". According to Sund, Lt. Gen. Piatt stated, "I don't like the visual of the National Guard standing a police line with the Capitol in the background".

Sund pleaded with Lt. Gen. Piatt to send the Guard, but Lt. Gen. Piatt stated that only Army Secretary McCarthy had the authority to approve such a request and he could not recommend that Secretary McCarthy approve the request for assistance directly to the Capitol. The D.C. officials were subsequently described as "flabbergasted" at this message.

McCarthy would later state that he was not in this conference call because he was already entering a meeting with senior Department leadership. General Charles A. Flynn, brother to the controverial General Michael Flynn, participated in the call. By 3:37 p.m., the Pentagon dispatched its own security forces to guard the homes of senior defense leaders, "even though no rioters or criminal attacks are occurring at those locations."

Chief Sund later opines "This demonstrates to me that the Pentagon fully understands the urgency and danger of the situation even as it does nothing to support us on the Hill."

In response to the denial expressed by Department of Defense leaders during the 2:26 conference call, D.C. officials contacted the State of Virginia. The Public Safety Secretary of Virginia, Brian Moran, dispatched the Virginia State Police to the U.S. Capitol as permitted by mutual aid agreement with D.C.

At 3:46 PM, after leaders of the Department of Defense learned that the Virginia National Guard may have mobilized, National Guard Gen. Hokanson call the Virginia commander to verify Virginia Guard would not move without prior permission from the Pentagon.

At 3:55, Hokanson made a similar call to the commander of the Maryland National Guard.

On January 6, Miller ultimately withheld permission to deploy the National Guard until 4:32 pm, after assets from Virginia had already entered the District, FBI tactical teams had arrived at the Capitol, and Trump had instructed rioters to "go home".

Miller's permission would not actually be relayed to the Commander of the Guard until 5:08. Sund recalls a comment from the DC National Guard commander Gen. Walker who said: "Steve, I felt so bad. I wanted to help you immediately, but I couldn't. I could hear the desperation in your voice, but they wouldn't let me come. When we arrived, I saw the New Jersey State Police. Imagine how I felt. New Jersey got here before we did!"

Discrepant statements:

The Army falsely denied for two weeks that Lt. Gen. Charles A. Flynn – the Army deputy chief of staff for Operations, Plans and Training – was in the conference call requesting the Guard. Flynn's role drew scrutiny in light of his brother Michael's recent calls for martial law and a redo election overseen by the military. Flynn testified that "he never expressed a concern about the visuals, image, or public perception of" sending the Guard to the Capitol; Col. Earl Matthews, who participated in the call and took contemporaneous notes, called Flynn's denial "outright perjury". 

Department of Defense leaders claim they called the DC National Guard commander at 4:30 to relay permission to deploy—leaders with the Guard deny this call ever took place.

Secret Service and Homeland Security text messages:

As part of its investigation into the events of January 6, the Office of Inspector General requested text messages from the Secret Service. In response, the messages were deleted.  Text messages from Department of Homeland Security leaders Chad Wolf and Ken Cuccinelli "are missing from a key period leading up to the January 6 attack".

Wolf's nomination had been withdrawn by the White House sometime on January 6. A criminal investigation was opened into the deletion.


Participants, groups, and criminal charges
Main article: Criminal proceedings in the January 6 United States Capitol attack

By August 2023, over 1,100 defendants had been charged for their role in the attack. The attackers included some of Trump's longtime and most fervent supporters from across the United States. The mob included:
  • Republican Party officials,
  • current and former state legislators and political donors,
  • far-right militants, 
  • white supremacists,
  • conservative evangelical Christians 
  • and participants of the "Save America" Rally. 

​According to the FBI, dozens of people on its terrorist watchlist were in D.C. for pro-Trump events on the 6th, with the majority being "suspected white supremacists". Some came heavily armed and some were convicted criminals, including a man who had been released from a Florida prison after serving a sentence for attempted murder.

Proud Boys
​Main article: Proud Boys § Participation in the January 6 United States Capitol attack
See also: Planning of the January 6 United States Capitol attack § Proud Boys

​The Proud Boys played a much greater role in planning and coordinating the attack than was known in 2021. In 2022, new information appeared in testimony to the January 6th Committee and in a New York Times investigative video. 

Another key revelation about the Proud Boys' plans came from an informant and concerned Mike Pence: According to an F.B.I. affidavit the panel highlighted ... a government informant said that members of the far-right militant group the Proud Boys told him they would have killed Pence 'if given the chance.' The rioters on January 6th almost had that chance, coming within forty feet of the Vice-President as he fled to safety.

On July 7, 2023, Barry Bennet Ramey was sentenced to 5 years in prison. He was connected to the Proud Boys and pepper-sprayed police in the face. 

Proud Boys leaders Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl were sentenced to 17 and 15 years respectively.

Proud Boy Dominic Pezzola, who breached the capitol with a stolen police riot shield, was sentenced to 10 years.

Proud Boys founder Enrique Tarrio, described as the "ultimate leader" of the conspiracy, was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

Oath Keepers:
Main article: Oath Keepers § Participation in the January 6 United States Capitol attack
See also: Planning of the January 6 United States Capitol attack § Oath Keepers

​The Oath Keepers are an American far-right anti-government militia whose leaders have been convicted of violently opposing the government of the United States, including the transfer of presidential power as prescribed by the United States constitution. It was incorporated in 2009 by founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes, a lawyer and former paratrooper.

In 2023, Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years for seditious conspiracy for his role in the attack, and another Oath Keepers leader, Kelly Meggs, was sentenced to 12 years for the same crime.

​On January 13, 2022, 10 members of the Oath Keepers, including founder Stewart Rhodes, were arrested and charged with seditious conspiracy. On November 29, a jury convicted Rhodes and Florida chapter Oath Keeper leader Kelly Meggs of seditious conspiracy. Three other members of the Oath Keepers were found not guilty of seditious conspiracy, but were convicted on other related charges.
​
On May 23, 2023, Oath Keeper founder Stewart Rhodes, age 57, was sentenced to 18 years in prison.

The Department of Justice announced plans to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for longer prison terms for Rhodes and his co-defendants. 

At sentencing, the Court described Rhodes as dangerous, noting "The moment you are released, whenever that may be, you will be ready to take up arms against your government." 

Eight of Rhodes's militiamen were convicted of seditious of conspiracy among other charges. Kelly Meggs was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Jessica Watkins was sentenced to 8 years and six months and Kenneth Harrelson was sentenced to four years in prison. Both convicts were members of the Oath Keepers, with Watkins' crimes including merging her local Ohio armed group with the Oath Keepers in 2020, and Harrelson serving as the right-hand man to Kelly Meggs, leader of the Florida chapter.

​QAnon
Main article: QAnon § Attempts to overturn the 2020 U.S. election

QAnon is an American political conspiracy theory and political movement that originated in the American far-right political sphere in 2017. QAnon centers on fabricated claims made by an anonymous individual or individuals known as "Q".

Those claims have been relayed and developed by online communities and influencers. Their core belief is that a cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic child molesters are operating a global child sex trafficking ring which conspired against Donald Trump. 

Watchdogs studied QAnon posts and warned of the potential for violence ahead of January 6, 2021. Multiple QAnon-affiliated protesters participated in the attack. One participant whose attire and behavior attracted worldwide media attention was Jake Angeli, a QAnon supporter nicknamed the "QAnon Shaman". 

Ashli Babbitt, a rioter who was shot dead by police as she was trying to break into the Speaker's Lobby, was a committed follower of QAnon. The day before the attack, she had tweeted: "the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours".

White supremacists, neo-Nazis, and neo-Confederates

​​​Far-right emblematic gear was worn by some participants, including: 
Anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi group NSC-131 (Nationalist Social Club) was at the event, although it is unknown to what extent. Following the event, members of the group detailed their actions and claimed they were the "beginning of the start of White Revolution in the United States". After the attack, two white nationalists known for racist and anti-Semitic rhetoric streamed to their online followers a video posted on social media showing a man harassing an Israeli journalist seeking to conduct a live report outside the building.

Some of the rioters carried American flags, Confederate battle flags, or Nazi emblems. For the first time in U.S. history, a Confederate battle flag was displayed inside the Capitol.

​The laptop computer taken from Pelosi's office was taken by 22-year-old Capitol rioter Riley Williams, a member of the Atomwaffen. Williams' boyfriend, who tipped off police, said that she had intended to send the stolen laptop to a friend in Russia for sale to Russian intelligence. Williams was sentenced to 3 years in prison.
​
The National Capital Region Threat Intelligence Consortium, a fusion center that aids the DHS and other federal national security and law enforcement groups, wrote that potentially violent individuals were joining the protest from the neo-Nazi group Atomwaffen Division and Stormfront. Despite this information, the Secret Service released an internal memo that stated there was no concern.

Others:

Although the anti-government Boogaloo movement mostly were opposing Donald Trump, a Boogaloo follower said several groups under his command helped attack the Capitol, taking the opportunity to strike against the federal government. 

Also present during the riot were:
Shirts with references to famous internet meme Pepe the Frog were also seen, alongside
  • "1776" and "MAGA civil war 2021" shirts,
  • NSC-131 stickers,
  • and the valknut symbol.

Rioters were seen using the OK gesture, a gesture that had been famously co-opted as an alt-right dog whistle. Christian imagery, including a large "Jesus saves" banner, was seen in the crowd of demonstrators. Various other iconography was also on display, such as flags of other countries.

Anti-vaccine activists and conspiracy theorists were also present at the rally. Members of the right-wing Tea Party Patriots-backed group America's Frontline Doctors, including founder Simone Gold and its communications director, were arrested. She was later sentenced to 60 days in prison by a US federal court in Washington, D.C., for illegally entering the US Capitol building. 

West Virginia Delegate Derrick Evans, a state lawmaker, filmed himself entering the Capitol alongside rioters. On January 8, he was charged by federal authorities with entering a restricted area; he resigned from the House of Delegates the next day and was ultimate sentenced to 90 days in jail. Amanda Chase was censured by the Virginia State Senate for her actions surrounding the event.
​
Police and military connections;

Politico reported some rioters briefly showing their police badges or military identification to law enforcement as they approached the Capitol, expecting to be let inside; a Capitol Police officer told BuzzFeed News that one rioter had told him "[w]e're doing this for you" as he flashed a badge. One former police officer, Laura Steele, was convicted for breaching the Capitol with fellow Oath Keepers.

A number of U.S. military personnel participated in the riot:  the Department of Defense is investigating members on active and reserve duty who may have been involved in the riot. Nearly 20% of defendants charged in relation to the attack and about 12% of the participants in general were current or former members of the U.S. military. 

​A report from George Washington University and the Combating Terrorism Center said that "if anything ... there actually is a very slight underrepresentation of veterans among the January 6 attackers". Police officers and a police chief from departments in multiple states are under investigation for their alleged involvement in the riot. Two Capitol Police officers were suspended, one for directing rioters inside the building while wearing a Make America Great Again hat, and the other for taking a selfie with a rioter.

Analysis

​An academic analysis reported in The Atlantic in February 2021 found that of the 193 people so far arrested for invading the Capitol, 89 percent had no clear public connection to established far-right militias, known white-nationalist gangs, or any other known militant organizations. "The overwhelming reason for action, cited again and again in court documents, was that arrestees were following Trump's orders to keep Congress from certifying Joe Biden as the presidential-election winner".

They were older than participants in previous far-right violent demonstrations and more likely to be employed, with 40% being business owners. The researchers concluded that these "middle-aged, middle-class insurrectionists" represented "a new force in American politics – not merely a mix of right-wing organizations, but a broader mass political movement that has violence at its core and draws strength even from places where Trump supporters are in the minority".

The Associated Press reviewed public and online records of more than 120 participants after the attack and found that many of them shared conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election on social media and had also believed other QAnon and "deep state" conspiracy theories.

Additionally, several had threatened Democratic and Republican politicians before the attack. The event was described as "Extremely online", with "pro-Trump internet personalities" and fans streaming live footage while taking selfies.

According to The University of Maryland's National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism:

The "ordinary people" argument misses, or at least obscures, the extent to which the Capitol rioters were linked to dangerous groups and ideas. … at least 280 of the individuals charged with committing crimes on Jan. 6 were associated with extremist groups or conspiratorial movements. This includes:
  • 78 defendants who had links to the Proud Boys, a group with a history of violence;
  • 37 members of the anti-government Oath Keepers militia;
  • 31 individuals who embraced the similarly anti-government and militant views of the Three Percenters movement;
  • and 92 defendants who promoted aspects of QAnon. ...

These 280 individuals make up approximately 35 percent of the Capitol defendants. While it is true that they do not represent a majority of the more than 800 people who have been charged in connection with the riot, … A 35 percent rate of participation in extremism among a collective of apparently "ordinary" individuals is an astounding number – one that should shake us to our core.

​Federal officials estimate that about ten thousand rioters entered the Capitol grounds, and the Secret Service and FBI have estimated that about 1,200 ultimately entered the building.

More than 800 video and audio files – including D.C. Metropolitan Police radio transmissions, Capitol Police body-worn camera footage, and Capitol surveillance camera footage – were later obtained as evidence in Trump's impeachment trial.
  • The evidence showed that the assailants launched a large and coordinated attack; for example, "Security camera footage near the House chamber shows the rioters waving in reinforcements to come around the corner.
  • Another video shows more than 150 rioters charging through a breached entrance in just a minute-and-a-half". While assaulting the Capitol, the crowd chanted "Fight, Fight"; "Stop the steal"; and "Fight for Trump". As they were overrun by a violent mob, the police acted with restraint and pleaded for backup. 
  • Many of the attackers employed tactics, body armor and technology (such as two-way radio headsets) similar to those of the very police they were confronting. 
  • Some rioters wore riot gear, including helmets and military-style vests.
  • A pair of rioters carried plastic handcuffs, which they found on a table inside the Capitol. 
  • In an analysis of later court documents, it was reported that at least 85 participants in the riot were charged with carrying or using a weapon, such as guns, knives, axes, chemical sprays, police gear and stun guns, in the riots to assault others or break objects. It is also illegal to brandish weapons at the Capitol.


Outcome:
​
Casualties and suicides:
Further information:  See also: Killing of Ashli Babbitt and Death of Brian Sicknick

​​Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed 35-year-old Air Force veteran, was fatally shot in the upper chest by Lt. Michael Leroy Byrd while attempting to climb through the shattered window of a barricaded door.

Brian Sicknick, a 42-year-old responding Capitol Police officer, was pepper-sprayed during the riot and had two thromboembolic strokes the next day, after which he was placed on life support and soon died. The D.C. chief medical examiner found he died from a stroke, classifying his death as natural, and commenting that "all that transpired played a role in his condition".

Rosanne Boyland, 34, died of an amphetamine overdose during the riot rather than, as was initially reported, from being trampled by other rioters after her collapse, ruled accidental by the D.C. medical examiner's office. Her mother, Cheryl Boyland, told NBC News, "She was not doing drugs. The only thing they found was her own prescription medicine."

Kevin Greeson, 55, and Benjamin Philips, 50, died naturally from coronary heart disease and hypertensive heart disease.

Four officers from various police departments who responded to the attack committed suicide in the days and months that followed:
  • Capitol Police Officer Howard Charles Liebengood died by suicide three days after the attack,
  • and D.C. Metropolitan Police Officer Jeffrey Smith, who was injured in the attack, died by suicide from a gunshot wound to the head at George Washington Memorial Parkway on January 15, after a misdiagnosed concussion. 
  • In July, two more members of law enforcement who responded to the attack died by suicide:
    • Metropolitan Police Officer Kyle Hendrik DeFreytag was found on July 10,
    • Metropolitan Police Officer Gunther Paul Hashida was found on July 29.

​Some rioters and 138 police officers (73 Capitol Police and 65 Metropolitan Police) were injured, of whom 15 were hospitalized, some with severe injuries. All had been released from the hospital by January 11.

Damage:

​Damage included:
  • Rioters stormed the offices of Nancy Pelosi, flipping tables and ripping photos from walls; 
  • the office of the Senate Parliamentarian was ransacked;
  • art was looted; 
  • and feces were tracked into several hallways.;
  • windows were smashed throughout the building, leaving the floor littered with glass and debris;
  • rioters damaged, turned over, or stole furniture.
  • one door had "MURDER THE MEDIA" scribbled onto it; rioters damaged Associated Press recording and broadcasting equipment outside the Capitol after chasing away reporters; 
  • rioters also destroyed a display honoring the life of congressman and civil rights leader John Lewis.
  • A photo of Representative Andy Kim (D–NJ) cleaning up the litter in the rotunda after midnight went viral.
  • the rioters caused extensive physical damage;

Architect of the Capitol J. Brett Blanton, who leads the office charged with maintaining the Capitol and preserving its art and architecture, reported in congressional testimony from late February 2021 that the combined costs of repairing the damage and post-attack security measures (such as erecting temporary perimeter fencing) already exceeded $30 million and would continue to increase. 

In May 2021, U.S. prosecutors estimated that the damage would cost almost $1.5 million. Interior damage from the riot included:
  • broken glass,
  • broken doors,
  • and graffiti;
  • as well as defecation throughout the complex, on the floor and smeared on the walls;
  • some statues, paintings, and furniture were damaged by pepper spray, tear gas, and fire extinguishing agents deployed by rioters and police;
  • the historic bronze Columbus Doors were damaged;
  • Items, including portraits of John Quincy Adams and James Madison, as well as a marble statue of Thomas Jefferson, were covered in "corrosive gas agent residue"; these were sent to the Smithsonian for assessment and restoration; 
  • A 19th-century marble bust of President Zachary Taylor was defaced with what seemed to be blood, but the most important works in the Capitol collection, such as the John Trumbull paintings, were unharmed.
  • On the Capitol's exterior, two 19th-century bronze light fixtures designed by Frederick Law Olmsted were damaged.

​Because the Capitol has no insurance against loss, taxpayers will pay for damage inflicted by the siege. Rare old-growth mahogany wood, stored in Wisconsin for more than one hundred years by the Forest Products Laboratory, was used to replace damaged wood fixtures and doors at the Capitol.
​
Laptop theft and cybersecurity concerns:

A laptop owned by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) was stolen. A laptop taken from Speaker Pelosi's office was a "laptop from a conference room ... that was only used for presentations", according to Pelosi's deputy chief of staff. 

Representative Ruben Gallego (D–AZ) said "we have to do a full review of what was taken, or copied, or even left behind in terms of bugs and listening devices". 

Military news website SOFREP reported that "several" secret‑level laptops were stolen, some of which had been abandoned while still logged in to SIPRNet, causing authorities to temporarily shut down SIPRNet for a security update on January 7 and leading the United States Army Special Operations Command to re-authorize all SIPRNet-connected computers on January 8.

Representative Anna Eshoo (D–CA) said in a statement that "[i]mages on social media and in the press of vigilantes accessing congressional computers are worrying" and she had asked the Chief Administrative Officer of the House (CAO) "to conduct a full assessment of threats based on what transpired". The CAO said it was "providing support and guidance to House offices as needed".
​

Aftermath:

Political, legal, and social repercussions​

These paragraphs are an excerpt from Aftermath of the January 6 United States Capitol attack.:

The attack was followed by political, legal, and social repercussions. The second impeachment of Donald Trump, who was charged for incitement of insurrection for his conduct, occurred on January 13.

At the same time, Cabinet officials were pressured to invoke the 25th Amendment for removing Trump from office. Trump was subsequently acquitted in the Senate trial, which was held in February after Trump had already left office. The result was a 57–43 vote in favor of conviction, with every Democrat and seven Republicans voting to convict, but two-thirds of the Senate (67 votes) are required to convict.

​Many in the Trump administration resigned. Several large companies announced they were halting all political donations, and others have suspended funding the lawmakers who had objected to certifying Electoral College results. A bill was introduced to form an independent commission, similar to the 9/11 Commission, to investigate the events surrounding the attack; it passed the House but was blocked by Republicans in the Senate. The House then approved a House "select committee" to investigate the attack.

In June, the Senate released the results of its own investigation of the riot. The event led to strong criticism of law enforcement agencies. Leading figures within the United States Capitol Police resigned.

A large-scale criminal investigation was undertaken, with the FBI opening more than 400 case files. Federal law enforcement undertook a nationwide manhunt for the perpetrators, with arrests and indictments following within days. More than 615 people have been charged with federal crimes.

Per his involvement in inciting the attack, Trump was suspended from various social media sites, at first temporarily and then indefinitely. In response to posts by Trump supporters in favor of the attempts to overturn the election, the social networking site Parler was shut down by its service providers. Corporate suspensions of other accounts and programs associated with participating groups also took place.

​The inauguration week was marked by nationwide security concerns. Unprecedented security preparations for the inauguration of Joe Biden were undertaken, including the deployment of 25,000 National Guard members. In May, the House passed a $1.9 billion Capitol security bill in response to the attack.

In the days following the attack on the Capitol, Republican politicians in at least three states introduced legislation creating new prohibitions on protest activity.

The attack was widely ridiculed by comedians. Chris Rock highlighted the attack in a "When did white men become victims?" routine, with comments including "Did you see the Capitol riots? What kind of White 'Planet of the Apes' shit was that?".

On August 1, 2023, Fitch Ratings downgraded the US credit rating from AAA to AA+, making it the second time in US history the government's credit rating was downgraded since Standard & Poor's downgrade in 2011.

Fitch Ratings directly cited the January 6, 2021 insurrection as a factor in its decision to downgrade, privately telling Biden officials that the event "indicated an unstable government." It also cited:
  • rising debt at the federal, state, and local levels,
  • a "steady deterioration in standards of governance" over the last two decades,
  • worsening political divisions around spending and tax policy,
  • and "repeated debt limit standoffs and last-minute resolutions."

Fitch Ratings did note in a previous report that while government stability declined from 2018 to 2021, it had increased since Biden assumed the presidency.
​
Although a few evangelical leaders supported the riots, most condemned the violence and criticized Trump for inciting the crowd. This criticism came from liberal Christian groups such as the Red-Letter Christians, as well as evangelical groups who were generally supportive of Trump. 

​This criticism did not noticeably affect evangelical support for Trump; investigative journalist Sarah Posner, author of Unholy: Why White Evangelicals Worship at the Altar of Donald Trump, argued that many white evangelical Christians in the U.S. create an echo chamber whereby Trump's missteps are blamed on the Democratic Party, leftists, or the mainstream media, the last of which being viewed as especially untrustworthy.

Domestic reactions:

These paragraphs are an excerpt from Domestic reactions to the January 6 United States Capitol attack.

In the aftermath of the attack, after drawing widespread condemnation from the U.S. Congress, members of his administration, and the media, 45th U.S. President Donald Trump released a video-taped statement on January 7 to stop the resignations of his staff and the threats of impeachment or removal from office.

In the statement, he condemned the violence at the U.S. Capitol, saying that "a new administration will be inaugurated", which was widely seen as a concession, and his "focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly, and seamless transition of power" to the Joe Biden administration. 

​Vanity Fair reported that Trump was at least partially convinced to make the statement by U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who told Trump a sufficient number of Senate Republicans would support removing him from office unless he conceded. 

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany had attempted to distance the administration from the rioters' behavior in a televised statement earlier in the day. 

On January 9, The New York Times reported that Trump had told White House aides he regretted committing to an orderly transition of power and would never resign from office. In a March 25 interview on Fox News, Trump defended the Capitol attackers, saying they were patriots who posed "zero threat", and he criticized law enforcement for "persecuting" the rioters.
​
The Joint Chiefs of Staff issued a statement on January 12 condemning the attack and reminding military personnel everywhere that incoming President Joe Biden was about to become their commander-in-chief, saying "... the rights of freedom of speech and assembly do not give anyone the right to resort to violence, sedition, and insurrection". 

​The statement also said, "As we have done throughout our history, the U.S. military will:
  • obey lawful orders from civilian leadership,
  • support civilian authorities to protect lives and property,
  • ensure public safety in accordance with the law,
  • and remain fully committed to protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic".

U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R–KY), then the Senate Majority Leader, called it a "failed insurrection", that "the mob was fed lies", and "they were provoked by the president and other powerful people".

Christopher Wray, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) since 2017, later characterized the incident as domestic terrorism.

President Biden, who described the rioters as "terrorists" aimed at "overturning the will of the American people" later shared this opinion.

In early 2021, the RAND Corporation released a framework to reduce the risk of extremist activity in the U.S. military.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the flags at the Capitol lowered to half-staff in honor of Brian Sicknick, a United States Capitol Police officer who died following the attacks.

​Trump initially declined to lower flags at the White House or other federal buildings under his control, before changing his mind four days later.

Biden, Mike Pence, and Pelosi offered condolences to Sicknick's family; Trump did not. After Sicknick's death, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) received backlash for previous speeches that were perceived as calls for violence.

A survey by the Hobby School of Public Affairs at the University of Houston taken January 12–20 showed that nearly a third (32%) of Texas Republicans supported the attack, although overall 83% of all Texans who expressed an opinion were opposed to it.

 In a poll of Americans just after the attack, 79% of those surveyed said America is "falling apart". In February 2022, the Republican National Committee called the events of January 6 "legitimate political discourse".

The US art world reacted through the chronicling of the day as well as the creation of new work. Starting January 7, 2021, the Smithsonian Museum enacted its "rapid-response protocol" to gather rally signs, posters, flags, and weapons abandoned on the National Mall and began work on a digital arts exhibit. 

Visual artist Paul Chan created his "A drawing as a recording of an insurrection", a 163-inch double-sided drawing exhibited at the Greene Naftali Gallery in New York. In December 2022, literary press Whiskey Tit released Tell Me What You See, the first fiction published about the attack.

At the one-year anniversary, One Six Comics published graphic novel series 1/6  and The Society of Classical Poets website posted various poems about the day, including one glorifying deceased rioter Ashli Babbitt.

Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, civil rights groups and celebrities immediately criticized the Capitol Police for a perceived "double standard" in the treatment of the protesters and rioters who were mostly white. Joe Biden stated, "No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protesting yesterday they wouldn't have been treated very, very differently than the mob of thugs that stormed the Capitol.

We all know that's true and it is unacceptable." Michelle Obama wrote, "Yesterday made it painfully clear that certain Americans are, in fact, allowed to denigrate the flag and symbols of our nation. They’ve just got to look the right way." Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who later resigned, explained they had prepared for a peaceful protest but were overwhelmed by an "angry, violent mob". Later in the year, at a White House ceremony to thank officers who responded to the riots that day, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris congratulated the police on their response, calling them "heroes".

International reactions:

These paragraphs are an excerpt from International reactions to the January 6 United States Capitol attack.

More than seventy countries and international organizations expressed their concerns over the attack and condemned the violence, with some specifically condemning President Donald Trump's own role in inciting the attack. Foreign leaders, diplomats, politicians, and institutions expressed shock, outrage, and condemnation of the events.

Multiple world leaders made a call for peace, describing the riots as "an attack on democracy".

The leaders of some countries, including Brazil, Poland and Hungary, declined to condemn the situation, and described it as an internal U.S. affair.

As early as January 2021, a few European security officials described the events as an attempted coup.


Analysis and terminology:
See also: Description of the attempts to overturn the election as an attempted coup

This section is an excerpt from Aftermath of the January 6 United States Capitol attack § Contemporary analysis and terminology.

A week following the attack, journalists were searching for an appropriate word to describe the event. According to the Associated Press, U.S. media outlets first described the developments on January 6 as "a rally or protest", but as the events of the day escalated and further reporting and images emerged, the descriptions shifted to "an assault, a riot, an insurrection, domestic terrorism or even a coup attempt". 

It was variably observed that the media outlets were settling on the terms "riot" and "insurrection". According to NPR, "By definition, 'insurrection', and its derivative, 'insurgency', are accurate. 'Riot' and 'mob' are equally correct. While these words are not interchangeable, they are all suitable when describing Jan. 6." 

The New York Times assessed the event as having brought the United States "hours away from a full-blown constitutional crisis". Presciently, Brian Stelter, in CNN Business, wrote that the events of the Capitol attack "will be remembered as an act of domestic terrorism against the United States".

The Encyclopædia Britannica described the attack "as an insurrection or attempted coup d'état". The encyclopedia added that "The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other law-enforcement agencies also considered it an act of domestic terrorism".

Furthermore, Encyclopædia Britannica classifies the Capitol attack under the topic of domestic terrorism and describes the United States Capitol as a "scene of domestic terrorism when supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the building as Congress was in the process of certifying Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 presidential election".

Federal judge David Carter described Trump's actions as "a coup in search of a legal theory". Naunihal Singh of the U.S. Naval War College, and author of Seizing Power: The Strategic Logic of Military Coups, wrote that the attack on the Capitol was "an insurrection, a violent uprising against the government" and "sedition", but not a coup because Trump did not order the military "to seize power on his behalf". 

​The Coup D'état Project of the Cline Center for Advanced Social Research at the University of Illinois, which tracks coups and coup attempts globally, classified the attack as an "attempted dissident coup", defined as an unsuccessful coup attempt "initiated by a small group of discontents" such as "ex-military leaders, religious leaders, former government leaders, members of a legislature/parliament, and civilians [but not police or the military]".

The Cline Center said the "organized, illegal attempt to intervene in the presidential transition" by displacing Congress met this definition. Some political scientists identified the attack as an attempted self-coup, in which the head of government attempts to strong-arm the other branches of government to entrench power. Academic Fiona Hill, a former member of Trump's National Security Council, described the attack, and Trump's actions in the months leading up to it, as an attempted self-coup.
​
As mentioned, the FBI classified the attack as domestic terrorism. At the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on March 2, 2021, Wray testified: I was appalled, like you, at the violence and destruction that we saw that day. I was appalled that you, our country's elected leaders, were victimized right here in these very halls. That attack, that siege was criminal behavior, plain and simple, and it's behavior that we, the FBI, view as domestic terrorism. It's got no place in our democracy and tolerating it would make a mockery of our nation's rule of law.

The Congressional Research Service also concluded that the attack met the federal definition of domestic terrorism. Republican senator Ted Cruz characterized it as terrorism at least eighteen times over the ensuing year, though he was among the Senate Republicans who blocked a bipartisan January 6 commission to investigate it.

On the January 4, 2021, Steve Bannon, while discussing the planning for the upcoming events and speech by Trump on January 6 at The Ellipse, described it as a "bloodless coup".
​
A March 2023 poll found that 20.5 percent of Americans believe that violence to achieve a political goal is sometimes justified. Nearly 12 percent expressed their willingness to use force to restore Trump to power. A June 2023 poll found that about 12 million American adults, or 4.4 percent of the adult population, believe violence is justified in returning Trump to the White House.
​
Historians' perspectives:
While there have been other instances of violence at the Capitol in the 19th and 20th centuries, this event was the most severe assault on the building since the 1814 burning of Washington by British forces during the War of 1812.

The last attempt on the life of the vice president was a bomb plot against Thomas Marshall in July 1915.

​For the first time in U.S. history, a Confederate battle flag was flown inside the Capitol. The Confederate States Army had never reached the Capitol, nor came closer than 6 miles (10 km) from the Capitol at the Battle of Fort Stevens, during the American Civil War.

​Douglas Brinkley, a historian at Rice University, remarked on how January 6 would be remembered in American history: "Now every Jan. 6, we're going to have to remember what happened... I worry if we lose the date that it will lose some of its wallop over time". He also wrote about Trump's responsibility during the attack: "There are always going to be puzzle pieces added to what occurred on Jan. 6, because the president of the United States was sitting there watching this on television in the White House, as we all know, allowing it to go on and on".
​
Speaking on January 6, 2022, historians Doris Kearns Goodwin and Jon Meacham warned that the U.S. remained at "a crucial turning point". Meacham commented, "What you saw a year ago today was the worst instincts of both human nature and American politics and it's either a step on the way to the abyss or it is a call to arms figuratively for citizens to engage".

Goodwin added, "We've come through these really tough times before. We've had lots of people who were willing to step up and put their public lives against their private lives. And that's what we've got to depend on today. That's what we need in these years and months ahead."

Robert Paxton considered the attack to be evidence that Trump's movement was an example of fascism, a characterization that Paxton had resisted up to that point. Paxton compared the event to the French 6 February 1934 crisis.

Richard J. Evans said that it was not a coup, but that it did represent a danger to democracy in the United States.

​14th Amendment disqualification argument:

Some legal scholars have argued that Trump is barred from presidential office under section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution because of his apparent support for the attack.

See also:


​

​


Project 2025: the End of American Democracy? Pictured below: POLL: VOTERS SOUNDLY REJECT MAGA REPUBLICAN ‘PROJECT 2025’ PLAN IN FAVOR OF PRESIDENT BIDEN’S CLEAN ENERGY PLAN
Project 2025

Project 2025 is a far-right plan to purge and reshape the U.S. Federal government in the event of a Republican victory in the 2024 United States presidential election.

Established in 2022, the project seeks to recruit thousands to come to Washington, D.C. to replace existing employees to restructure the federal government in the service of Trumpism, the personal ideology of Donald Trump. [see previous topic re: Trumpism] 

The plan would perform a rapid takeover of the entire U.S. federal government under a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory – a theory proposing the president of the United States has absolute power of the executive branch – upon inauguration. The development of the plan is led by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative U.S. think tank.

The plan includes widespread changes across the entire government. With regards to climate policy, Project 2025 specifically plans to undo the Inflation Reduction Act, shut down the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office, and increase the extraction and use of fossil fuels, among other measures.

Overview
​
Presidential powers:

Project 2025 seeks to place the entire U.S. federal government under direct presidential control, eliminating the independence of the Department of Justice, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission and other agencies.

The plan bases its presidential agenda on a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory, arguing that Article Two of the United States Constitution vests executive power solely to the president.

The concept of personal presidential power is central to the thinking of Donald Trump, the current front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, who falsely stated in 2019 that Article Two of the United States Constitution granted him the "right to do whatever as president".

A similar remark was echoed in 2018 when he claimed he could fire special counsel Robert Mueller.

Personnel:

Project 2025 establishes a personnel database shaped by the ideology of Donald Trump. Throughout his presidency, Trump has rooted out individuals who he considers disloyal regardless of their ideological conviction, such as former attorney general William Barr, calling them "snakes" and "traitors" in his post-presidency.

In the final year of Trump's presidency, White House Presidential Personnel Office employees James Bacon and John McEntee developed a questionnaire to test potential government employees on their commitment to Trumpism; Bacon and McEntee joined the project in May 2023.

Project 2025 is aligned with Trump's plans to fire more government employees than allocated to the president using Schedule F, a job classification established by Trump in an executive order in July 2020. Although the classification was rescinded by Joe Biden in January 2021, Trump intends to restore it.

The Heritage Foundation plans on having 20,000 personnel in its database by the end of 2024. Former Trump administration official Russell Vought and Project 2025 advisor stated that the project would be "a wrecking ball for the administrative state".

Climate policy:

Project 2025 does not provide strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change; Heritage Foundation energy and climate director Diana Furchtgott-Roth has suggested Americans should  use more natural gas, a cleaner burning fossil fuel.

Project 2025's blueprint includes repealing Inflation Reduction Act—a landmark law that offers US$370 billion to clean technology, shuttering the Loan Programs Office at the Department of Energy, eliminating climate change from the National Security Council agenda, and encouraging allied nations to use fossil fuels.

The blueprint supports Arctic drilling and declaring that the federal government has an "obligation to develop vast oil and gas and coal resources". Notably, Project 2025 would reverse a 2009 finding from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that determined that carbon dioxide emissions are harmful to human health, thereby preventing the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

The climate section of the report was written by several authors, including Mandy Gunasekara, the former chief of staff of the EPA who considers herself principal to the United States's withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement.

The role of the Department of Energy was drafted by Bernard McNamee, who has advised several fossil fuel companies. Four of the top authors of the report have publicly doubted the extent of humanity's role in causing climate change.

History:
​
Background and formation:

Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts established Project 2025 in 2022 to provide the 2024 Republican Party presidential nominee with a personnel and ideology framework after civil servants refused to support Trump during his attempt to:
Initial report:

In April 2023, the Heritage Foundation published a 920-page blueprint written by hundreds of conservatives, most prominently former Trump administration officials.

Reactions:

Numerous commentators see Project 2025 as a path to the ending of American democracy, which would replace it with an undemocratic authoritarian regime, possibly led by Trump as dictator.

Chauncey DeVega of Salon.com and Spencer Ackerman in The Nation have characterized Project 2025 as a plan to install Trump as a dictator, warning that Trump could prosecute and imprison enemies or overthrow American democracy altogether. 

The Atlantic's Tom Nichols considered the project a threat to democracy but expressed hope that it might still be defeated. 

David Corn, writing in Mother Jones, described it as "an authoritarian danger that threatens American democracy", which if undefeated "would place the nation on a path to autocracy."

Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons, the author of Just Faith: Reclaiming Progressive Christianity, criticized Project 2025 in an MSNBC article for appealing to Christian nationalism. In particular, Graves-Fitzsimmons critiques Roger Severino's chapter on the Department of Health and Human Services and his opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act, a landmark law that repealed the Defense of Marriage Act and codified the federal definition of marriage to recognize same-sex and interracial marriage.

Project 2025 has been criticized by LGBTQ+ writers and journalists for its removal of protections for LGBTQ+ people and declarations to outlaw pornography by claiming it as an "omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children". 

Brynn Tannehill, for Dame magazine, argued that the 902-page document "The Mandate for Leadership" in part "makes eradicating LGBTQ people from public life its top priority", while citing passages from the playbook linking pornography to "transgender ideology", arguing that it related to other anti-transgender attacks in 2023. 

In September 2023, Ari Drennen, LGBTQ program director for media watchdog group Media Matters for America, tweeted out the passage and similarly argued that "[t]hey’ve put it quite vividly – declare trans content porn, imprison those who make it, put teachers who discuss it on the sex offender registry, and force companies that host it to close."

Republican climate advocates have disagreed with Project 2025's climate policy. Joseph Rainey Center for Public Policy president Sarah Hunt considered supporting the Inflation Reduction Act crucial, and Utah representative John Curtis stated it was vital that Republicans "engage in supporting good energy and climate policy". 

​American Conservation Coalition founder Benji Backer noted growing consensus for human-induced climate change among younger Republicans and called the project wrongheaded.

See also:







President ​Joe Biden (2021-2025); ​ ​YouTube Videos follow: Pictured below, Joe Biden as: 
  • TOP: Senator Joe Biden: A young Sen. Joe Biden, a Democrat from Delaware, is seen in this undated photo at a press conference in Washington. His political career began in 1970, when he was elected to the New Castle County Council in Delaware at age 26. UPI File Photo License photo | Permalink
  • CENTER: Vice-President Joe Biden, With President Barack Obama
  • BOTTOM: President Joe Biden
​​Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. (born November 20, 1942) is an American politician who is the 46th and current president of the United States.

Ideologically a moderate member of the Democratic Party, he previously served as the 47th vice president from 2009 to 2017 under President Barack Obama and represented Delaware in the United States Senate from 1973 to 2009.

Born in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Biden moved with his family to Delaware in 1953. He studied at the University of Delaware before earning his law degree from Syracuse University.

He was elected to the New Castle County Council in 1970 and to the U.S. Senate in 1972.

As a senator, Biden drafted and led the effort to pass the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act and the Violence Against Women Act. He also oversaw six U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings, including the contentious hearings for Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.

Biden ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1988 and 2008. In 2008, Obama chose Biden as his running mate, and Biden was a close counselor to Obama during his two terms as vice president.

In the 2020 presidential election, Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, defeated incumbents Donald Trump and Mike Pence. Biden is the second Catholic president in U.S. history (after John F. Kennedy), and his politics have been widely described as profoundly influenced by Catholic social teaching.

Taking office at age 78, Biden is the oldest president in U.S. history, the first to have a female vice president, and the first from Delaware.

In 2021, he signed a bipartisan infrastructure bill, as well as a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus package in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and its related recession.

Biden proposed the Build Back Better Act, which failed in Congress, but aspects of which were incorporated into the Inflation Reduction Act that was signed into law in 2022.

Biden also:
In foreign policy, Biden restored America's membership in the Paris Agreement. He oversaw the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan that ended the war in Afghanistan, during which the Afghan government collapsed and the Taliban seized control. Biden has responded to the Russian invasion of Ukraine by imposing sanctions on Russia and authorizing civilian and military aid to Ukraine.

During the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, Biden announced American military support for Israel, and condemned the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian militants as terrorism. In April 2023, he announced his candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination in the 2024 presidential election.


Early life (1942–1965):
Main article: Early life and career of Joe Biden

Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was born on November 20, 1942, at St. Mary's Hospital in Scranton, Pennsylvania, to Catherine Eugenia "Jean" Biden (née Finnegan) and Joseph Robinette Biden Sr. The oldest child in a Catholic family of largely Irish descent, he has a sister, Valerie, and two brothers, Francis and James.

Biden's father had been wealthy and the family purchased a home in the affluent Long Island suburb of Garden City in the fall of 1946, but he suffered business setbacks around the time Biden was seven years old, and for several years the family lived with Biden's maternal grandparents in Scranton. 

Scranton fell into economic decline during the 1950s and Biden's father could not find steady work. Beginning in 1953 when Biden was ten, the family lived in an apartment in Claymont, Delaware, before moving to a house in nearby Mayfield. 

Biden Sr. later became a successful used-car salesman, maintaining the family in a middle-class lifestyle.

At Archmere Academy in Claymont, Biden played baseball and was a standout halfback and wide receiver on the high school football team. Though a poor student, he was class president in his junior and senior years. He graduated in 1961. 

At the University of Delaware in Newark, Biden briefly played freshman football, and, as an unexceptional student, earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1965 with a double major in history and political science.

Biden had a stutter, and has mitigated it since his early twenties. He has described his efforts to reduce it by reciting poetry before a mirror.


Marriages, law school, and early career (1966–1973)
Main article: Early career of Joe Biden
See also: Family of Joe Biden

On August 27, 1966, Biden married Neilia Hunter, a student at Syracuse University, after overcoming her parents' reluctance for her to wed a Roman Catholic. Their wedding was held in a Catholic church in Skaneateles, New York. They had three children: Joseph R. "Beau" Biden III, Robert Hunter Biden, and Naomi Christina "Amy" Biden.

​In 1968, Biden earned a Juris Doctor from Syracuse University College of Law, ranked 76th in his class of 85, after failing a course due to an acknowledged "mistake" when he plagiarized a law review article for a paper he wrote in his first year at law school. He was admitted to the Delaware bar in 1969.

In 1968, Biden clerked at a Wilmington law firm headed by prominent local Republican William Prickett and, he later said, "thought of myself as a Republican". He disliked incumbent Democratic Delaware governor Charles L. Terry's conservative racial politics and supported a more liberal Republican, Russell W. Peterson, who defeated Terry in 1968. 

Biden was recruited by local Republicans but registered as an Independent because of his distaste for Republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon.

In 1969, Biden practiced law, first as a public defender and then at a firm headed by a locally active Democrat who named him to the Democratic Forum, a group trying to reform and revitalize the state party; Biden subsequently reregistered as a Democrat. He and another attorney also formed a law firm. Corporate law did not appeal to him, and criminal law did not pay well. He supplemented his income by managing properties.
​
In 1970, Biden ran for the 4th district seat on the New Castle County Council on a liberal platform that included support for public housing in the suburbs. The seat had been held by Republican Henry R. Folsom, who was running in the 5th District following a reapportionment of council districts. 

Biden won the general election by defeating Republican Lawrence T. Messick, and took office on January 5, 1971. He served until January 1, 1973, and was succeeded by Democrat Francis R. Swift. During his time on the county council, Biden opposed large highway projects, which he argued might disrupt Wilmington neighborhoods.

Biden had not openly supported or opposed the Vietnam War until he ran for Senate and opposed Richard Nixon's conduct of the war. While studying at the University of Delaware and Syracuse University, Biden obtained five student draft deferments, at a time when most draftees were sent to the war.

In 1968, based on a physical examination, he was given a conditional medical deferment; in 2008, a spokesperson for Biden said his having had "asthma as a teenager" was the reason for the deferment.

1972 U.S. Senate campaign in Delaware:
Main article: 1972 United States Senate election in Delaware

In 1972, Biden defeated Republican incumbent J. Caleb Boggs to become the junior U.S. senator from Delaware. He was the only Democrat willing to challenge Boggs, and with minimal campaign funds, he was given no chance of winning. 

Family members managed and staffed the campaign, which relied on meeting voters face-to-face and hand-distributing position papers, an approach made feasible by Delaware's small size. He received help from the AFL–CIO and Democratic pollster Patrick Caddell. 

His platform focused on the environment, withdrawal from Vietnam, civil rights, mass transit, equitable taxation, health care, and public dissatisfaction with "politics as usual". 

A few months before the election, Biden trailed Boggs by almost thirty percentage points, but his energy, attractive young family, and ability to connect with voters' emotions worked to his advantage, and he won with 50.5% of the vote.

Death of wife and daughter:

On December 18, 1972, a few weeks after Biden was elected senator, his wife Neilia and one-year-old daughter Naomi were killed in an automobile accident while Christmas shopping in Hockessin, Delaware. Neilia's station wagon was hit by a semi-trailer truck as she pulled out from an intersection. Their sons Beau (aged 3) and Hunter (aged 2) were taken to the hospital in fair condition, Beau with a broken leg and other wounds and Hunter with a minor skull fracture and other head injuries. 

Biden considered resigning to care for them, but Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield persuaded him not to. The accident filled Biden with anger and religious doubt. He wrote that he "felt God had played a horrible trick" on him, and he had trouble focusing on work.

Police never filed charges against the truck driver, determining that it was Neilia who did not see the oncoming truck as she pulled out of the intersection, possibly due to visibility issues.

However, Biden later said on several occasions that the truck driver had been drinking alcohol before the collision, and several media outlets reported this as fact. The driver died in 1999, but his daughter sought to have his name again cleared and to get an apology from Biden. The chief prosecutor who investigated the case said there was no evidence of drunk driving. 

Subsequently, a Biden spokesperson said that Biden "fully accepts the [driver's] family's word that these rumors were false". Biden called the driver's daughter to apologize, and she accepted his apology.

Second marriage

​Biden met the teacher Jill Tracy Jacobs in 1975 on a blind date. They married at the United Nations chapel in New York on June 17, 1977. They spent their honeymoon at Lake Balaton in the Hungarian People's Republic. 

Biden credits her with the renewal of his interest in politics and life. Biden is Roman Catholic and attends Mass with his wife, Jill, at St. Joseph's on the Brandywine in Greenville, Delaware. Their daughter, Ashley Biden, is a social worker, and is married to physician Howard Krein. 

Beau Biden became an Army Judge Advocate in Iraq and later Delaware Attorney General before dying of brain cancer in 2015. Hunter Biden worked as a Washington lobbyist and investment adviser; his business dealings and personal life came under significant scrutiny during his father's presidency.

Teaching:

From 1991 to 2008, as an adjunct professor, Biden co-taught a seminar on constitutional law at Widener University School of Law. The seminar often had a waiting list.

Biden sometimes flew back from overseas to teach the class.


U.S. Senate (1973–2009):
Main article: US Senate career of Joe Biden

Senate activities:

​In January 1973, secretary of the Senate Francis R. Valeo swore Biden in at the Delaware Division of the Wilmington Medical Center. Present were his sons Beau (whose leg was still in traction from the automobile accident) and Hunter and other family members. 

At 30, Biden was the seventh-youngest senator in U.S. history. To see his sons, Biden traveled by train between his Delaware home and D.C.—74 minutes each way—and maintained this habit throughout his 36 years in the Senate.

Elected to the Senate in 1972, Biden was reelected in 1978, 1984, 1990, 1996, 2002, and 2008, regularly receiving about 60% of the vote. 

He was junior senator to William Roth, who was first elected in 1970, until Roth was defeated in 2000. As of 2023, he was the 19th-longest-serving senator in U.S. history.

During his early years in the Senate, Biden focused on consumer protection and environmental issues and called for greater government accountability. In a 1974 interview, he described himself as liberal on civil rights and liberties, senior citizens' concerns and healthcare but conservative on other issues, including abortion and military conscription. 

Biden was the first U.S. senator to endorse Jimmy Carter for president in the 1976 Democratic primary. Carter went on to win the Democratic nomination and defeat incumbent Republican President Gerald Ford in the 1976 election.

Biden also worked on arms control. After Congress failed to ratify the SALT II Treaty signed in 1979 by Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev and President Jimmy Carter, Biden met with Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko to communicate American concerns and secured changes that addressed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's objections. 

Biden received considerable attention when he excoriated Secretary of State George Shultz at a Senate hearing for the Reagan administration's support of South Africa despite its continued policy of apartheid.

In the mid-1970s, Biden was one of the Senate's strongest opponents of race-integration busing. His Delaware constituents strongly opposed it, and such opposition nationwide later led his party to mostly abandon school integration policies. 

In his first Senate campaign, Biden had expressed support for busing to remedy de jure segregation, as in the South, but opposed its use to remedy de facto segregation arising from racial patterns of neighborhood residency, as in Delaware; he opposed a proposed constitutional amendment banning busing entirely. 

In 1976, Biden supported a measure forbidding the use of federal funds for transporting students beyond the school closest to them. In 1977, he co-sponsored an amendment closing loopholes in that measure, which President Carter signed into law in 1978.

Biden became ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1981. In 1984, he was a Democratic floor manager for the successful passage of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act. His supporters praised him for modifying some of the law's worst provisions, and it was his most important legislative accomplishment to that time. 

In 1994, Biden helped pass the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which included a ban on assault weapons, and the Violence Against Women Act, which he has called his most significant legislation. 

The 1994 crime law was unpopular among progressives and criticized for resulting in mass incarceration; in 2019, Biden called his role in passing the bill a "big mistake", citing its policy on crack cocaine and saying that the bill "trapped an entire generation".

In 1993, Biden voted for a provision that deemed homosexuality incompatible with military life, thereby banning gays from serving in the armed forces. In 1996, he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages, thereby barring individuals in such marriages from equal protection under federal law and allowing states to do the same. 

In 2015, the act was ruled unconstitutional in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Biden was critical of Independent Counsel Ken Starr during the 1990s Whitewater controversy and Lewinsky scandal investigations, saying "it's going to be a cold day in hell" before another independent counsel would be granted similar powers. He voted to acquit during the impeachment of President Clinton. 

During the 2000s, Biden sponsored bankruptcy legislation sought by credit card issuers. Clinton vetoed the bill in 2000, but it passed in 2005 as the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, with Biden being one of only 18 Democrats to vote for it, while leading Democrats and consumer rights organizations opposed it. 

As a senator, Biden strongly supported increased Amtrak funding and rail security.

Brain surgeries:

In February 1988, after several episodes of increasingly severe neck pain, Biden was taken by ambulance to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for surgery to correct a leaking intracranial berry aneurysm. While recuperating, he suffered a pulmonary embolism, a serious complication. After a second aneurysm was surgically repaired in May, Biden's recuperation kept him away from the Senate for seven months.

Senate Judiciary Committee:

​​Biden was a longtime member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He chaired it from 1987 to 1995 and was a ranking minority member from 1981 to 1987 and again from 1995 to 1997.

As chair, Biden presided over two highly contentious U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings. When Robert Bork was nominated in 1988, Biden reversed his approval‍—‌ given in an interview the previous year‍—‌ of a hypothetical Bork nomination.

Conservatives were angered, but at the hearings' close Biden was praised for his fairness, humor, and courage. Rejecting the arguments of some Bork opponents, Biden framed his objections to Bork in terms of the conflict between Bork's strong originalism and the view that the U.S. Constitution provides rights to liberty and privacy beyond those explicitly enumerated in its text. Bork's nomination was rejected in the committee by a 5–9 vote and then in the full Senate, 42–58.

During Clarence Thomas's nomination hearings in 1991, Biden's questions on constitutional issues were often convoluted to the point that Thomas sometimes lost track of them, and Thomas later wrote that Biden's questions were akin to "beanballs". After the committee hearing closed, the public learned that Anita Hill, a University of Oklahoma law school professor, had accused Thomas of making unwelcome sexual comments when they had worked together. 

Biden had known of some of these charges, but initially shared them only with the committee because Hill was then unwilling to testify. The committee hearing was reopened and Hill testified, but Biden did not permit testimony from other witnesses, such as a woman who had made similar charges and experts on harassment. 

The full Senate confirmed Thomas by a 52–48 vote, with Biden opposed. Liberal legal advocates and women's groups felt strongly that Biden had mishandled the hearings and not done enough to support Hill. In 2019, he told Hill he regretted his treatment of her, but Hill said afterward she remained unsatisfied.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

Biden was a longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He became its ranking minority member in 1997 and chaired it from June 2001 to 2003 and 2007 to 2009. His positions were generally liberal internationalist. 

He collaborated effectively with Republicans and sometimes went against elements of his own party. During this time he met with at least 150 leaders from 60 countries and international organizations, becoming a well-known Democratic voice on foreign policy.

Biden voted against authorization for the Gulf War in 1991, siding with 45 of the 55 Democratic senators. He said the U.S. was bearing almost all the burden in the anti-Iraq coalition.

Biden became interested in the Yugoslav Wars after hearing about Serbian abuses during the Croatian War of Independence in 1991. Once the Bosnian War broke out, Biden was among the first to call for the "lift and strike" policy. 

The George H. W. Bush administration and Clinton administration were both reluctant to implement the policy, fearing Balkan entanglement. In April 1993, Biden held a tense three-hour meeting with Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević. Biden worked on several versions of legislative language urging the U.S. toward greater involvement.

Biden has called his role in affecting Balkan policy in the mid-1990s his "proudest moment in public life" related to foreign policy. In 1999, during the Kosovo War, Biden supported the 1999 NATO bombing of FR Yugoslavia. He and Senator John McCain co-sponsored the McCain-Biden Kosovo Resolution, which called on Clinton to use all necessary force, including ground troops, to confront Milošević over Yugoslav actions toward ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq:
Main article: War on terror

​Biden was a strong supporter of the War in Afghanistan, saying, "Whatever it takes, we should do it." As head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he said in 2002 that Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was a threat to national security and there was no other option than to "eliminate" that threat. 

In October 2002, he voted in favor of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, approving the U.S. Invasion of Iraq. As chair of the committee, he assembled a series of witnesses to testify in favor of the authorization.

They gave testimony grossly misrepresenting the intent, history, and status of Saddam and his secular government, which was an avowed enemy of al-Qaeda, and touted Iraq's fictional possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Biden eventually became a critic of the war and viewed his vote and role as a "mistake", but did not push for withdrawal.

He supported the appropriations for the occupation, but argued that the war should be internationalized, that more soldiers were needed, and that the Bush administration should "level with the American people" about its cost and length.

By late 2006, Biden's stance had shifted considerably. He opposed the troop surge of 2007, saying General David Petraeus was "dead, flat wrong" in believing the surge could work. Biden instead advocated dividing Iraq into a loose federation of three ethnic states. 

Rather than continue the existing approach or withdrawing, the plan called for "a third way": federalizing Iraq and giving Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis "breathing room" in their own regions. In September 2007, a non-binding resolution endorsing the plan passed the Senate, but the idea failed to gain traction.


Presidential campaigns of 1988 and 2008:

1988 campaign:
Main article: Joe Biden 1988 presidential campaign

​Biden formally declared his candidacy for the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination on June 9, 1987. He was considered a strong candidate because of his moderate image, his speaking ability, his high profile as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the upcoming Robert Bork Supreme Court nomination hearings, and his appeal to Baby Boomers; he would have been the second-youngest person elected president, after John F. Kennedy. 

He raised more in the first quarter of 1987 than any other candidate.

By August his campaign's messaging had become confused due to staff rivalries, and in September, he was accused of plagiarizing a speech by British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock. Biden's speech had similar lines about being the first person in his family to attend university. Biden had credited Kinnock with the formulation on previous occasions, but did not on two occasions in late August. 

Kinnock himself was more forgiving; the two men met in 1988, forming an enduring friendship.

Earlier that year he had also used passages from a 1967 speech by Robert F. Kennedy (for which his aides took blame) and a short phrase from John F. Kennedy's inaugural address; two years earlier he had used a 1976 passage by Hubert Humphrey. 

Biden responded that politicians often borrow from one another without giving credit, and that one of his rivals for the nomination, Jesse Jackson, had called him to point out that he (Jackson) had used the same material by Humphrey that Biden had used.

A few days later, an incident in law school in which Biden drew text from a Fordham Law Review article with inadequate citations was publicized. He was required to repeat the course and passed with high marks. At Biden's request the Delaware Supreme Court's Board of Professional Responsibility reviewed the incident and concluded that he had violated no rules.

Biden has made several false or exaggerated claims about his early life:
  • that he had earned three degrees in college,
  • that he attended law school on a full scholarship,
  • that he had graduated in the top half of his class,
  • and that he had marched in the civil rights movement. 

The limited amount of other news about the presidential race amplified these disclosures and on September 23, 1987, Biden withdrew his candidacy, saying it had been overrun by "the exaggerated shadow" of his past mistakes.

2008 campaign:
Main article: Joe Biden 2008 presidential campaign

​After exploring the possibility of a run in several previous cycles, in January 2007, Biden declared his candidacy in the 2008 elections. During his campaign, Biden focused on the Iraq War, his record as chairman of major Senate committees, and his foreign-policy experience. 

Biden was noted for his one-liners during the campaign; in one debate he said of Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani: "There's only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun, and a verb and 9/11."

Biden had difficulty raising funds, struggled to draw people to his rallies, and failed to gain traction against the high-profile candidacies of Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton. He never rose above single digits in national polls of the Democratic candidates.

In the first contest on January 3, 2008, Biden placed fifth in the Iowa caucuses, garnering slightly less than one percent of the state delegates. He withdrew from the race that evening.

Despite its lack of success, Biden's 2008 campaign raised his stature in the political world. In particular, it changed the relationship between Biden and Obama. Although they had served together on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, they had not been close: Biden resented Obama's quick rise to political stardom, while Obama viewed Biden as garrulous and patronizing.

Having gotten to know each other during 2007, Obama appreciated Biden's campaign style and appeal to working-class voters, and Biden said he became convinced Obama was "the real deal".


Vice presidential campaigns of 2008 and 2012:

2008 campaign
Main articles: 
Shortly after Biden withdrew from the presidential race, Obama privately told him he was interested in finding an important place for Biden in his administration. In early August, Obama and Biden met in secret to discuss the possibility, and developed a strong personal rapport. 

On August 22, 2008, Obama announced that Biden would be his running mate. The New York Times reported that the strategy behind the choice reflected a desire to fill out the ticket with someone with foreign policy and national security experience. Others pointed out Biden's appeal to middle-class and blue-collar voters. Biden was officially nominated for vice president on August 27 by voice vote at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Biden's vice-presidential campaigning gained little media attention, as the press devoted far more coverage to the Republican nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Under instructions from the campaign, Biden kept his speeches succinct and tried to avoid offhand remarks, such as one he made about Obama's being tested by a foreign power soon after taking office, which had attracted negative attention. 

Privately, Biden's remarks frustrated Obama. "How many times is Biden gonna say something stupid?" he asked.  Obama campaign staffers called Biden's blunders "Joe bombs" and kept Biden uninformed about strategy discussions, which in turn irked Biden. 

Relations between the two campaigns became strained for a month, until Biden apologized on a call to Obama and the two built a stronger partnership.

As the financial crisis of 2007–2010 reached a peak with the liquidity crisis of September 2008 and the proposed bailout of the United States financial system became a major factor in the campaign, Biden voted for the $700 billion Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which passed in the Senate, 74–25. 

On October 2, 2008, he participated in the vice-presidential debate with Palin at Washington University in St. Louis. Post-debate polls found that while Palin exceeded many voters' expectations, Biden had won the debate overall.

On November 4, 2008, Obama and Biden were elected with 53% of the popular vote and 365 electoral votes to McCain–Palin's 173.

At the same time Biden was running for vice president, he was also running for reelection to the Senate, as permitted by Delaware law. On November 4, he was reelected to the Senate, defeating Republican Christine O'Donnell. 

Having won both races, Biden made a point of waiting to resign from the Senate until he was sworn in for his seventh term on January 6, 2009. Biden cast his last Senate vote on January 15, supporting the release of the second $350 billion for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and resigned from the Senate later that day.

2012 campaign:
Main article: Barack Obama 2012 presidential campaign

In October 2010, Biden said Obama had asked him to remain as his running mate for the 2012 presidential election, but with Obama's popularity on the decline, White House Chief of Staff William M. Daley conducted some secret polling and focus group research in late 2011 on the idea of replacing Biden on the ticket with Hillary Clinton. 

The notion was dropped when the results showed no appreciable improvement for Obama, and White House officials later said Obama himself had never entertained the idea.

Biden's May 2012 statement that he was "absolutely comfortable" with same-sex marriage gained considerable public attention in comparison to Obama's position, which had been described as "evolving". 

Biden made his statement without administration consent, and Obama and his aides were quite irked, since Obama had planned to shift position several months later, in the build-up to the party convention. 

Gay rights advocates seized upon Biden's statement, and within days, Obama announced that he too supported same-sex marriage, an action in part forced by Biden's remarks. Biden apologized to Obama in private for having spoken out, while Obama acknowledged publicly it had been done from the heart.

The Obama campaign valued Biden as a retail-level politician, and he had a heavy schedule of appearances in swing states as the reelection campaign began in earnest in spring 2012. An August 2012 remark before a mixed-race audience that Republican proposals to relax Wall Street regulations would "put y'all back in chains" once again drew attention to Biden's propensity for colorful remarks. 

In the vice-presidential debate on October 11 with Republican nominee Paul Ryan, Biden defended the Obama administration's record. 

On November 6, Obama and Biden won reelection over Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan with 332 of 538 Electoral College votes and 51% of the popular vote.


Vice presidency (2009–2017):
See also: Presidency of Barack Obama

First term (2009–2013)

​Biden said he intended to eliminate some explicit roles assumed by George W. Bush's vice president, Dick Cheney, and did not intend to emulate any previous vice presidency. On January 20, 2009, he was sworn in as the 47th vice president of the United States. 

He was the first vice president from Delaware and the first Roman Catholic vice president.

Obama was soon comparing Biden to a basketball player "who does a bunch of things that don't show up in the stat sheet". In May, Biden visited Kosovo and affirmed the U.S. position that its "independence is irreversible". 

Biden lost an internal debate to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about sending 21,000 new troops to Afghanistan, but his skepticism was valued, and in 2009, Biden's views gained more influence as Obama reconsidered his Afghanistan strategy. 

Biden visited Iraq about every two months, becoming the administration's point man in delivering messages to Iraqi leadership about expected progress there. More generally, overseeing Iraq policy became Biden's responsibility: Obama was said to have said, "Joe, you do Iraq." 

By 2012, Biden had made eight trips there, but his oversight of U.S. policy in Iraq receded with the exit of U.S. troops in 2011.

​Biden oversaw infrastructure spending from the Obama stimulus package intended to help counteract the ongoing recession. During this period, Biden was satisfied that no major instances of waste or corruption had occurred, and when he completed that role in February 2011, he said the number of fraud incidents with stimulus monies had been less than one percent.

In late April 2009, Biden's off-message response to a question during the beginning of the swine flu outbreak led to a swift retraction by the White House. 

The remark revived Biden's reputation for gaffes. Confronted with rising unemployment through July 2009, Biden acknowledged that the administration had "misread how bad the economy was" but maintained confidence the stimulus package would create many more jobs once the pace of expenditures picked up. 

On March 23, 2010, a microphone picked up Biden telling the president that his signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was "a big fucking deal". Despite their different personalities, Obama and Biden formed a friendship, partly based around Obama's daughter Sasha and Biden's granddaughter Maisy, who attended Sidwell Friends School together.

Members of the Obama administration said Biden's role in the White House was to be a contrarian and force others to defend their positions. Rahm Emanuel, White House chief of staff, said that Biden helped counter groupthink. Obama said, "The best thing about Joe is that when we get everybody together, he really forces people to think and defend their positions, to look at things from every angle, and that is very valuable for me."

The Bidens maintained a relaxed atmosphere at their official residence in Washington, often entertaining their grandchildren, and regularly returned to their home in Delaware.

Biden campaigned heavily for Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections, maintaining an attitude of optimism in the face of predictions of large-scale losses for the party.

Following big Republican gains in the elections and the departure of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, Biden's past relationships with Republicans in Congress became more important. He led the successful administration effort to gain Senate approval for the New START treaty. 

In December 2010, Biden's advocacy for a middle ground, followed by his negotiations with Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, were instrumental in producing the administration's compromise tax package that included a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts. 

The package passed as the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.

In March 2011, Obama delegated Biden to lead negotiations with Congress to resolve federal spending levels for the rest of the year and avoid a government shutdown. The U.S. debt ceiling crisis developed over the next few months, but Biden's relationship with McConnell again proved key in breaking a deadlock and bringing about a deal to resolve it, in the form of the Budget Control Act of 2011, signed on August 2, 2011, the same day an unprecedented U.S. default had loomed. 

Some reports suggest that Biden opposed proceeding with the May 2011 U.S. mission to kill Osama bin Laden, lest failure adversely affect Obama's reelection prospects.

In December 2012, Obama named Biden to head the Gun Violence Task Force, created to address the causes of school shootings and consider possible gun control to implement in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Later that month, during the final days before the United States fell off the "fiscal cliff", Biden's relationship with McConnell again proved important as the two negotiated a deal that led to the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 being passed at the start of 2013. 

It made many of the Bush tax cuts permanent but raised rates on upper income levels.

Second term (2013–2017):

​Biden was inaugurated to a second term on January 20, 2013, at a small ceremony at Number One Observatory Circle, his official residence, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor presiding (a public ceremony took place on January 21).

Biden played little part in discussions that led to the October 2013 passage of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014, which resolved the federal government shutdown of 2013 and the debt-ceiling crisis of 2013. This was because Senate majority leader Harry Reid and other Democratic leaders cut him out of any direct talks with Congress, feeling Biden had given too much away during previous negotiations.

Biden's Violence Against Women Act was reauthorized again in 2013. The act led to related developments, such as the White House Council on Women and Girls, begun in the first term, as well as the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault, begun in January 2014 with Biden and Valerie Jarrett as co-chairs.

Biden favored arming Syria's rebel fighters. As the ISIL insurgency in Iraq intensified in 2014, renewed attention was paid to the Biden-Gelb Iraqi federalization plan of 2006, with some observers suggesting Biden had been right all along. 

Biden himself said the U.S. would follow ISIL "to the gates of hell". Biden had close relationships with several Latin American leaders and was assigned a focus on the region during the administration; he visited the region 16 times during his vice presidency, the most of any president or vice president. 

In August 2016, Biden visited Serbia, where he met with the Serbian Prime Minister, Aleksandar Vučić, and expressed his condolences for civilian victims of the bombing campaign during the Kosovo War.

Biden never cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, making him the longest-serving vice president with this distinction.

Role in the 2016 presidential campaign:

During his second term, Biden was often said to be preparing for a bid for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. With his family, many friends, and donors encouraging him in mid-2015 to enter the race, and with Hillary Clinton's favorability ratings in decline at that time, Biden was reported to again be seriously considering the prospect and a "Draft Biden 2016" PAC was established.

By late 2015, Biden was still uncertain about running. He felt his son's recent death had largely drained his emotional energy, and said, "nobody has a right ... to seek that office unless they're willing to give it 110% of who they are." On October 21, speaking from a podium in the Rose Garden with his wife and Obama by his side, Biden announced his decision not to run for president in 2016.


Subsequent activities (2017–2019):

​​After leaving the vice presidency, Biden became an honorary professor at the University of Pennsylvania, developing the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement. Biden remained in that position into 2019, before running for president.

In 2017, Biden wrote a memoir, Promise Me, Dad, and went on a book tour. By 2019, he and his wife reported that they had earned over $15 million since the end of his vice presidency from speaking engagements and book sales.

Biden remained in the public eye, endorsing candidates while continuing to comment on politics, climate change, and the presidency of Donald Trump. He also continued to speak out in favor of LGBT rights, continuing advocacy on an issue he had become more closely associated with during his vice presidency. 

In 2018, Biden gave a eulogy for Senator John McCain, praising McCain's embrace of American ideals and bipartisan friendships. Biden continued to support efforts to find treatments for cancer.


2020 presidential campaign:
Main article: Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign

Speculation and announcement:

Between 2016 and 2019, media outlets often mentioned Biden as a likely candidate for president in 2020. When asked if he would run, he gave varied and ambivalent answers, saying "never say never".

A political action committee known as Time for Biden was formed in January 2018, seeking Biden's entry into the race. He finally launched his campaign on April 25, 2019, saying he was prompted to run because he was worried by the Trump administration and felt a "sense of duty".

Campaign:

As the 2020 campaign season heated up, voluminous public polling showed Biden as one of the best-performing Democratic candidates in a head-to-head matchup against President Trump. With Democrats keenly focused on "electability" for defeating Trump, this boosted his popularity among Democratic voters. It also made Biden a frequent target of Trump. 

In September 2019, it was reported that Trump had pressured Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy to investigate alleged wrongdoing by Biden and his son Hunter Biden.

Despite the allegations, no evidence was produced of any wrongdoing by the Bidens.

Trump's pressure to investigate the Bidens was perceived by many as an attempt to hurt Biden's chances of winning the presidency. Trump's alleged actions against Biden resulted in a political scandal and Trump's impeachment by the House of Representatives for abuse of power and obstruction of congress.

In March 2019 and April 2019, eight women accused Biden of previous instances of inappropriate physical contact, such as embracing, touching or kissing. Biden had previously called himself a "tactile politician" and admitted this behavior had caused trouble for him. 

Journalist Mark Bowden described Biden's lifelong habit of talking close, writing that he "doesn't just meet you, he engulfs you... scooting closer" and leaning forward to talk. In April 2019, Biden pledged to be more "respectful of people's personal space".

Throughout 2019, Biden stayed generally ahead of other Democrats in national polls. Despite this, he finished fourth in the Iowa caucuses, and eight days later, fifth in the New Hampshire primary. He performed better in the Nevada caucuses, reaching the 15% required for delegates, but still finished 21.6 percentage points behind Bernie Sanders. 

Making strong appeals to Black voters on the campaign trail and in the South Carolina debate, Biden won the South Carolina primary by more than 28 points. After the withdrawals and subsequent endorsements of candidates Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, he made large gains in the March 3 Super Tuesday primary elections.

Biden won 18 of the next 26 contests, putting him in the lead overall. Elizabeth Warren and Mike Bloomberg soon dropped out, and Biden expanded his lead with victories over Sanders in four states on March 10.

In late March 2020, Tara Reade, one of the eight women who in 2019 had accused Biden of inappropriate physical contact, accused Biden of having sexually assaulted her in 1993. There were inconsistencies between Reade's 2019 and 2020 allegations. Biden and his campaign denied the sexual assault allegation.

When Sanders suspended his campaign on April 8, 2020, Biden became the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee for president. On April 13, Sanders endorsed Biden in a live-streamed discussion from their homes. 

Former President Barack Obama endorsed Biden the next day. 

On August 11, Biden announced U.S. Senator Kamala Harris of California as his running mate, making her the first African American and first South Asian American vice-presidential nominee on a major-party ticket. 

On August 18, 2020, Biden was officially nominated at the 2020 Democratic National Convention as the Democratic Party nominee for president in the 2020 election.

Presidential transition:
Main article: Presidential transition of Joe Biden

Biden was elected the 46th president of the United States in November 2020. He defeated the incumbent, Donald Trump, becoming the first candidate to defeat a sitting president since Bill Clinton defeated George H. W. Bush in 1992.

Trump refused to concede, insisting the election had been "stolen" from him through "voter fraud", challenging the results in court and promoting numerous conspiracy theories about the voting and vote-counting processes, in an attempt to overturn the election results.

Biden's transition was delayed by several weeks as the White House ordered federal agencies not to cooperate. 

On November 23, General Services Administrator Emily W. Murphy formally recognized Biden as the apparent winner of the 2020 election and authorized the start of a transition process to the Biden administration.

On January 6, 2021, during Congress' electoral vote count, Trump told supporters gathered in front of the White House to march to the Capitol, saying, "We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved." 

Soon after, they attacked the Capitol. During the insurrection at the Capitol, Biden addressed the nation, calling the events "an unprecedented assault unlike anything we've seen in modern times". After the Capitol was cleared, Congress resumed its joint session and officially certified the election results with Vice President Mike Pence, in his capacity as President of the Senate, declaring Biden and Harris the winners.


Presidency (2021–present): ​
Inauguration:
Main article: Inauguration of Joe Biden

Biden was inaugurated as the 46th president of the United States on January 20, 2021. At 78, he is the oldest person to have assumed the office. He is the second Catholic president (after John F. Kennedy) and the first president whose home state is Delaware. 

He is also the first man since George H. W. Bush to have been both vice president and president, and the second non-incumbent vice president (after Richard Nixon in 1968) to be elected president. He is also the first president from the Silent Generation.

Biden's inauguration was "a muted affair unlike any previous inauguration" due to COVID-19 precautions as well as massively increased security measures because of the January 6 United States Capitol attack.

Trump did not attend, becoming the first outgoing president since 1869 to not attend his successor's inauguration.

First 100 days:
See also: First 100 days of Joe Biden's presidency

In his first two days as president, Biden signed 17 executive orders. By his third day, orders had included:
In his first two weeks in office, Biden signed more executive orders than any other president since Franklin D. Roosevelt had in their first month in office.

On February 4, 2021, the Biden administration announced that the United States was ending its support for the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen.

​On March 11, the first anniversary of COVID-19 having been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization, Biden signed into law the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus and relief package that he had proposed to support the United States' recovery from the economic and health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The package included direct payments to most Americans, an extension of increased unemployment benefits, funds for vaccine distribution and school reopenings, and expansions of health insurance subsidies and the child tax credit.

Biden's initial proposal included an increase of the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, but after the Senate parliamentarian determined that including the increase in a budget reconciliation bill would violate Senate rules, Democrats declined to pursue overruling her and removed the increase from the package.

Also in March, amid a rise in migrants entering the U.S. from Mexico, Biden told migrants, "Don't come over." In the meantime, migrant adults "are being sent back", Biden said, in reference to the continuation of the Trump administration's Title 42 policy for quick deportations. 

Biden earlier announced that his administration would not deport unaccompanied migrant children; the rise in arrivals of such children exceeded the capacity of facilities meant to shelter them (before they were sent to sponsors), leading the Biden administration in March to direct the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help.

On April 14, Biden announced that the United States would delay the withdrawal of all troops from the war in Afghanistan until September 11, signaling an end to the country's direct military involvement in Afghanistan after nearly 20 years. In February 2020, the Trump administration had made a deal with the Taliban to completely withdraw U.S. forces by May 1, 2021. 

Biden's decision met with a wide range of reactions, from support and relief to trepidation at the possible collapse of the Afghan government without American support. 

On April 22–23, Biden held an international climate summit at which he announced that the U.S. would cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 50%–52% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.

Other countries also increased their pledges. 

On April 28, the eve of his 100th day in office, Biden delivered his first address to a joint session of Congress.

Domestic policy:

​On June 17, Biden signed the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act, which officially declared Juneteenth a federal holiday. Juneteenth is the first new federal holiday since 1986. 

In July 2021, amid a slowing of the COVID-19 vaccination rate in the country and the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, Biden said that the country has "a pandemic for those who haven't gotten the vaccination" and that it was therefore "gigantically important" for Americans to be vaccinated.

Economy:

Biden entered office nine months into a recovery from the COVID-19 recession and his first year in office was characterized by robust growth in real GDP, employment, wages and stock market returns, amid significantly elevated inflation. Real GDP grew 5.9 percent, the fastest rate in 37 years. 

Amid record job creation, the unemployment rate fell at the fastest pace on record during the year. By the end of 2021, inflation reached a nearly 40-year high of 7.1 percent, which was partially offset by the highest nominal wage and salary growth in at least 20 years.

In his third month in office, Biden signed an executive order to increase the minimum wage for federal contractors to $15 per hour, an increase of nearly 37 percent. The order went into effect for 390,000 workers in January 2022.

In early 2022, Biden made efforts to change his public image after entering the year with low approval ratings due to inflation and high gas prices, which continued to fall to approximately 40 percent in aggregated polls by February. 

After 5.9 percent growth in 2021, real GDP growth cooled in Biden's second year to 2.1 percent, after slightly negative growth in the first half spurred recession concerns. Job creation and consumer spending remained strong through the year, as the unemployment rate fell to match a 53-year low of 3.5 percent in December.

Inflation peaked at 8.9 percent in June but began easing in the second half of the year, to 6.5 percent in December. Stocks had their worst performance since 2008.

Widespread predictions of an imminent recession through 2022 and 2023 proved unwarranted and by late 2023 indicators showed economic acceleration.

Over the course of five days in March 2023, three small- to mid-size U.S. banks failed, triggering a sharp decline in global bank stock prices and swift response by regulators to prevent potential global contagion.

After Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, the first to do so, Biden expressed opposition to a bailout by taxpayers. He claimed that the partial rollback of Dodd-Frank regulations contributed to the bank's failure.

At the beginning of the 118th Congress, Biden and congressional Republicans engaged in a standoff that raised the risk that the United States would default on its debt. Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy struck a deal to raise the debt limit, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. Biden signed it on June 3, averting a default. The deal was generally seen as favorable to Biden.

Judiciary:

​By the end of 2021, 40 of Biden's appointees to the federal judiciary had been confirmed, more than any president in his first year in office since Ronald Reagan. 

Biden has prioritized diversity in his judicial appointments more than any president in U.S. history, with most of his appointees being women and people of color. Most of his appointments have been in blue states, making a limited impact since the courts in these states already generally lean liberal.

In January 2022, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a moderate liberal nominated by Bill Clinton, announced his intention to retire from the Supreme Court. During his 2020 campaign, Biden vowed to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court if a vacancy occurred, a promise he reiterated after Breyer announced his retirement.

On February 25, Biden nominated federal judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. She was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 7 and sworn in on June 30.

Infrastructure and climate:
Further information: ​
As part of Biden's Build Back Better agenda, in late March 2021, he proposed the American Jobs Plan, a $2 trillion package addressing issues including:
  • transport infrastructure,
  • utilities infrastructure,
  • broadband infrastructure,
  • housing,
  • schools,
  • manufacturing,
  • research
  • and workforce development. 

After months of negotiations among Biden and lawmakers, in August 2021 the Senate passed a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill called the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, while the House, also in a bipartisan manner, approved that bill in early November 2021, covering infrastructure related to transport, utilities, and broadband. Biden signed the bill into law in mid-November 2021.

The other core part of the Build Back Better agenda was the Build Back Better Act, a $3.5 trillion social spending bill that expands the social safety net and includes major provisions on climate change. 

The bill did not have Republican support, so Democrats attempted to pass it on a party-line vote through budget reconciliation, but struggled to win the support of Senator Joe Manchin, even as the price was lowered to $2.2 trillion. After Manchin rejected the bill, the Build Back Better Act's size was reduced and comprehensively reworked into the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, covering deficit reduction, climate change, healthcare, and tax reform.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was introduced by Senators Chuck Schumer and Joe Manchin. The package aimed to raise $739 billion and authorize $370 billion in spending on energy and climate change, $300 billion in deficit reduction, three years of Affordable Care Act subsidies, prescription drug reform to lower prices, and tax reform. 

According to an analysis by the Rhodium Group, the bill will lower US greenhouse gas emissions between 31 percent and 44 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. On August 7, 2022, the Senate passed the bill (as amended) on a 51–50 vote, with all Democrats voting in favor, all Republicans opposed, and Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie.

The bill was passed by the House on August 12 and was signed by Biden on August 16.

Before and during the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26), Biden promoted an agreement that the U.S. and the European Union cut methane emissions by a third by 2030 and tried to add dozens of other countries to the effort. He tried to convince China and Australia to do more.

He convened an online Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Change to press other countries to strengthen their climate policy. Biden pledged to double climate funding to developing countries by 2024. 

Also at COP26, the U.S. and China reached a deal on greenhouse gas emission reduction. The two countries are responsible for 40 percent of global emissions. In July 2023, when the 2023 heat waves hit the U.S., Biden announced several measures to protect the population and said the heat waves were linked to climate change.

COVID-19 diagnosis:

On July 21, 2022, Biden tested positive for COVID-19 with reportedly mild symptoms. According to the White House, he was treated with Paxlovid. He worked in isolation in the White House for five days and returned to isolation when he tested positive again on July 30.

Other domestic policy issues:

In 2022, Biden endorsed a change to the Senate filibuster to allow for the passing of the Freedom to Vote Act and John Lewis Voting Rights Act, on both of which the Senate had failed to invoke cloture. 

The rules change failed when two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, joined Senate Republicans in opposing it.In April 2022, Biden signed into law the bipartisan Postal Service Reform Act of 2022 to revamp the finances and operations of the United States Postal Service agency.

On July 28, 2022, the Biden administration announced it would fill four wide gaps on the Mexico–United States border in Arizona near Yuma, an area with some of the busiest corridors for illegal crossings.

During his presidential campaign, Biden had pledged to cease all future border wall construction. This occurred after both allies and critics of Biden criticized his administration's management of the southern border.

​In the summer of 2022, several other pieces of legislation Biden supported passed Congress:

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act aimed to address gun reform issues following the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Texas. The act's gun control provisions include:
Biden signed the bill on June 25, 2022.

The Honoring our PACT Act of 2022 was introduced in 2021 and signed into law by Biden on August 10, 2022. The act intends to significantly improve healthcare access and funding for veterans who were exposed to toxic substances, including burn pits, during military service. The bill gained significant media coverage due to the activism of comedian Jon Stewart.

Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act into law on August 9, 2022. The act provides billions of dollars in new funding to boost domestic research on and manufacture of semiconductors, to compete economically with China.

On October 6, 2022, Biden pardoned all Americans convicted of "small" amounts of cannabis possession under federal law.

Two months later, he signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which repealed the Defense of Marriage Act and requires the federal government to recognize the validity of same-sex and interracial marriages.

2022 elections:

​​On September 2, 2022, in a nationally broadcast Philadelphia speech, Biden called for a "battle for the soul of the nation". Off camera, he called Trump supporters "semi-fascists", which Republican commentators denounced. 

A predicted Republican wave election did not materialize and the race for U.S. Congress control was much closer than expected, with Republicans securing a slim majority of 222 seats in the House of Representatives, and the Democratic caucus keeping control of the U.S. Senate, with 51 seats, a gain of one seat from the last Congress.

It was the first midterm election since 1986 in which the party of the incumbent president achieved a net gain in governorships, and the first since 1934 in which the president's party lost no state legislative chambers. 

Democrats credited Biden for their unexpectedly favorable performance, and he celebrated the results as a strong day for democracy.

Discovery of classified documents:
Main article: Joe Biden classified documents incident

On November 2, 2022, while packing files at the Penn Biden Center, Biden's attorneys found classified documents dating to his vice presidency in a "locked closet". According to the White House, the documents were reported that day to the U.S. National Archives, which recovered the documents the next day. 

On November 14, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed U.S. Attorney John R. Lausch Jr. to conduct an investigation. On December 20, a second batch of classified documents was discovered in the garage of Biden's Wilmington, Delaware residence.

The findings were made public on January 10, 2023, after several news organizations published articles on the investigation. On January 12, Garland appointed Robert K. Hur as special counsel to investigate "possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or other records". 

On January 20, after a 13-hour consensual search by FBI investigators, six more items with classified markings were recovered from Biden's Wilmington residence. FBI agents searched Biden's home in Rehoboth Beach on February 1 and collected papers and notes from his time as vice president, but did not find any classified information.

Foreign policy:
​
In June 2021, Biden took his first trip abroad as president. In eight days he visited Belgium, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. He attended a G7 summit, a NATO summit, and an EU summit, and held one-on-one talks with Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In September 2021, Biden announced AUKUS, a security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, to ensure "peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific over the long term"; the deal included nuclear-powered submarines built for Australia's use.

Withdrawal from Afghanistan:
Main article: Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021)

American forces began withdrawing from Afghanistan in 2020, under the provisions of a February 2020 US-Taliban agreement that set a May 1, 2021, deadline. The Taliban began an offensive on May 1. By early July, most American troops in Afghanistan had withdrawn. 

Biden addressed the withdrawal in July, saying, "The likelihood there's going to be the Taliban overrunning everything and owning the whole country is highly unlikely."

On August 15, the Afghan government collapsed under the Taliban offensive, and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani fled the country. 

Biden reacted by ordering 6,000 American troops to assist in the evacuation of American personnel and Afghan allies. He faced bipartisan criticism for the manner of the withdrawal, with the evacuation of Americans and Afghan allies described as chaotic and botched. 

​On August 16, Biden addressed the "messy" situation, taking responsibility for it, and admitting that the situation "unfolded more quickly than we had anticipated". He defended his decision to withdraw, saying that Americans should not be "dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves".

On August 26, a suicide bombing at the Kabul airport killed 13 U.S. service members and 169 Afghans. On August 27, an American drone strike killed two ISIS-K targets, who were "planners and facilitators", according to a U.S. Army general. 

On August 29, another American drone strike killed ten civilians, including seven children. The Defense Department initially claimed the strike was conducted on an Islamic State suicide bomber threatening Kabul Airport, but admitted the suspect was harmless on September 17, calling its killing of civilians "a tragic mistake".

The U.S. military completed withdrawal from Afghanistan on August 30. Biden called the extraction of over 120,000 Americans, Afghans and other allies "an extraordinary success". He acknowledged that up to 200 Americans who wanted to leave did not, despite his August 18 pledge to keep troops in Afghanistan until all Americans who wanted to leave had left.

Aid to Ukraine:

In late February 2022, after warning for several weeks that an attack was imminent, Biden led the U.S. response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, imposing severe sanctions on Russia and authorizing over $8 billion in weapons shipments to Ukraine. 

On April 29, Biden asked Congress for $33 billion for Ukraine, but lawmakers later increased it to about $40 billion. Biden blamed Vladimir Putin for the emerging energy and food crises, saying, "Putin's war has raised the price of food because Ukraine and Russia are two of the world's major breadbaskets for wheat and corn, the basic product for so many foods around the world."

On February 20, 2023, four days before the anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Biden visited Kyiv and met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and first lady of Ukraine Olena Zelenska. While there, he promised more military aid to Ukraine and denounced the war. The trip was unannounced, and involved major security coordination to ensure safety.

China relations:
Further information: China–United States relations
​
China's assertiveness, particularly in the Pacific, remains a challenge for Biden. The Solomon Islands-China security pact caused alarm, as China could build military bases across the South Pacific.

Biden sought to strengthen ties with Australia and New Zealand in the wake of the deal, as Anthony Albanese succeeded to the premiership of Australia and Jacinda Ardern's government took a firmer line on Chinese influence. 

In a September 2022 interview with 60 Minutes, Biden said that U.S. forces would defend Taiwan in the event of "an unprecedented attack" by the Chinese, which is in contrast to the long-standing U.S. policy of "strategic ambiguity" toward China and Taiwan.

The September comments came after three previous comments by Biden that the U.S. would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion. Amid increasing tension with China, Biden's administration has repeatedly walked back his statements and asserted that U.S. policy toward Taiwan has not changed. 

In late 2022, Biden issued several executive orders and federal rules designed to slow Chinese technological growth, and maintain U.S. leadership over computing, biotech, and clean energy.

On February 4, 2023, Biden ordered the United States Air Force to shoot down a suspected Chinese surveillance balloon off the coast of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The Biden administration described the balloon as carrying two railroad cars' equivalent of spy equipment with a propeller for maneuverability. 

The State Department said the balloon carried antennas and other equipment capable of geolocating communications signals, and similar balloons from China have flown over more than 40 nations. 

The Chinese government denied that the balloon was a surveillance device, instead claiming it was a civilian (mainly meteorological) airship that had blown off course. The incident was seen as damaging to U.S. and China relations.

Israel:

In May 2021, during a flareup in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Biden said, "my party still supports Israel". 

In October 2023, Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel that devolved into a war, jeopardizing the administration's push to normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. 

Biden stated his unequivocal support for Israel, deployed aircraft carriers in the region to deter others from joining the war, and called for an additional $14 billion in military aid to Israel. He later began pressuring Israel to address the growing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Other foreign issues:

In early February 2022, Biden ordered the counterterrorism raid in northern Syria that resulted in the death of Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, the second leader of the Islamic State. 

In late July, Biden approved the drone strike that killed Ayman al-Zawahiri, the second leader of Al-Qaeda, and an integral member in the planning of the September 11 attacks. The 2022 OPEC+ oil production cut caused a diplomatic spat with Saudi Arabia, widening the rift between the two countries, and threatening a longstanding alliance.

In August 2023, Biden's letter to Peruvian President Dina Boluarte for Fiestas Patrias praising her government for "advancing our democratic values, including human rights" raised controversy due to her administration's violent response to protests, including the Ayacucho and Juliaca massacres.


Impeachment inquiry:
Main article: Impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden

On September 12, 2023, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy initiated a formal impeachment inquiry against Biden, saying that recent House investigations "paint a picture of corruption" by him and his family. 

Congressional investigations, most notably by the House Oversight committee, have discovered no evidence of wrongdoing by Biden.

2024 presidential campaign:
Further information: Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign

Ending months of speculation, on April 25, 2023, Biden confirmed he would run for a second term as president in the 2024 election, with Harris again as his running mate. The campaign launched four years to the day after the start of his 2020 presidential campaign. 

It was also announced that Julie Chávez Rodriguez would serve as campaign manager and Quentin Fulks would be principal deputy campaign manager. Co-chairs include: 
On the day of his announcement, a Gallup poll found that Biden's approval rating was just 37 percent. Most who were surveyed in the poll said that the economy was their biggest concern. During his campaign, Biden has promoted his economic record by touting the creation of over 13 million jobs, faster pandemic recovery in terms of GDP than other G7 countries, and the longest period of low unemployment in over 50 years.


Political positions:
Main article: Political positions of Joe Biden

​Biden is a moderate Democrat whose positions are deeply influenced by Catholic social teaching.

According to political scientist Carlo Invernizzi Accetti, "it has become second nature to describe his politics with such ready-made labels as centrist or moderate." Accetti says that Biden represents an Americanized form of Christian democracy, taking positions characteristic of both the center-right and center-left. 

Biden has cited the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain, credited with starting the Christian democratic movement, as immensely influential in his thinking. In 2022, journalist Sasha Issenberg wrote that Biden's "most valuable political skill" was "an innate compass for the ever-shifting mainstream of the Democratic Party".

Biden has proposed partially reversing the corporate tax cuts of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, saying that doing so would not hurt businesses' ability to hire.

But he supports raising the corporate tax only up to 28% from the 21% established in the 2017 bill, not back to 35%, the corporate tax rate until 2017. 

He voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. 

Biden is a staunch supporter of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). He has promoted a plan to expand and build upon it, paid for by revenue gained from reversing some Trump administration tax cuts. 

Biden's plan aims to expand health insurance coverage to 97% of Americans, including by creating a public health insurance option.

Biden did not support national same-sex marriage rights while in the Senate and voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, but opposed proposals for constitutional amendments that would have banned same-sex marriage nationwide. Biden has supported same-sex marriage since 2012.

As a senator, Biden forged deep relationships with police groups and was a chief proponent of a Police Officer's Bill of Rights measure that police unions supported but police chiefs opposed. 

In 2020, Biden also ran on decriminalizing cannabis, after advocating harsher penalties for drug use as a U.S. senator.

Biden believes action must be taken on global warming. As a senator, he co-sponsored the Boxer–Sanders Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act, the most stringent climate bill in the United States Senate. 

Biden opposes drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He wants to achieve a carbon-free power sector in the U.S. by 2035 and stop emissions completely by 2050. His program includes reentering the Paris Agreement, nature conservation, and green building. 

Biden supports environmental justice, including climate justice, and has taken steps to implement it. A major step is increasing energy efficiency, water efficiency and resilience to climate disasters in low-income houses. This should help mitigate climate change, reduce costs for households, and improve health and safety. 

Biden has called global temperature rise above the 1.5 degree limit the "only existential threat humanity faces even more frightening than a nuclear war". Despite his clean energy policies and congressional Republicans characterizing them as a "War on American Energy", domestic oil production reached a record high in October 2023.

Biden has said the U.S. needs to "get tough" on China, calling it the "most serious competitor" that poses challenges to the United States' "prosperity, security, and democratic values". Biden has spoken about human rights abuses in the Xinjiang region to the Chinese Communist Party leader Xi Jinping, pledging to sanction and commercially restrict Chinese government officials and entities who carry out repression.

Biden has said he is against regime change, but for providing non-military support to opposition movements. He opposed direct U.S. intervention in Libya, voted against U.S. participation in the Gulf War, voted in favor of the Iraq War, and supports a two-state solution in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. 

Biden has pledged to end U.S. support for the Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen and to reevaluate the United States' relationship with Saudi Arabia. 

Biden supports extending the New START arms control treaty with Russia to limit the number of nuclear weapons deployed by both sides. 

In 2021, Biden officially recognized the Armenian genocide, becoming the first U.S. president to do so.

Biden has supported abortion rights throughout his presidency. In 2019, he said he supported Roe v. Wade and repealing the Hyde Amendment. 

After Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, he criticized near-total bans on abortion access passed in a majority of Republican-controlled states, and took measures to protect abortion rights in the United States. He has vowed to sign a bill codifying the protections of Roe into federal law; such a bill passed the House in 2022, but was unable to clear the Senate filibuster.


Public image:
Main article: Public image of Joe Biden

​Biden was consistently ranked one of the least wealthy members of the Senate, which he attributed to his having been elected young. Feeling that less-wealthy public officials may be tempted to accept contributions in exchange for political favors, he proposed campaign finance reform measures during his first term. 

As of November 2009, Biden's net worth was $27,012. By November 2020, the Bidens were worth $9 million, largely due to sales of Biden's books and speaking fees after his vice presidency.

The political writer Howard Fineman has written, "Biden is not an academic, he's not a theoretical thinker, he's a great street pol. He comes from a long line of working people in Scranton—auto salesmen, car dealers, people who know how to make a sale. He has that great Irish gift." 

Political columnist David S. Broder wrote that Biden has grown over time: "He responds to real people—that's been consistent throughout. And his ability to understand himself and deal with other politicians has gotten much much better." 

Journalist James Traub has written that "Biden is the kind of fundamentally happy person who can be as generous toward others as he is to himself". In recent years, especially after the 2015 death of his elder son Beau, Biden has been noted for his empathetic nature and ability to communicate about grief. 

In 2020, CNN wrote that his presidential campaign aimed to make him "healer-in-chief", while The New York Times described his extensive history of being called upon to give eulogies.

Journalist and TV anchor Wolf Blitzer has called Biden loquacious; journalist Mark Bowden has said that he is famous for "talking too much", leaning in close "like an old pal with something urgent to tell you". He often deviates from prepared remarks and sometimes "puts his foot in his mouth". 

Biden has a reputation for being prone to gaffes and in 2018 called himself "a gaffe machine". The New York Times wrote that Biden's "weak filters make him capable of blurting out pretty much anything". During his presidency, several Republicans have criticized Biden's publicized gaffes as related to cognitive health issues due to his age, which Biden has repeatedly denied.

According to The New York Times, Biden often embellishes elements of his life or exaggerates, a trait also noted by The New Yorker in 2014. For instance, he has claimed to have been more active in the civil rights movement than he actually was, and has falsely recalled being an excellent student who earned three college degrees. 

The Times wrote, "Mr. Biden's folksiness can veer into folklore, with dates that don't quite add up and details that are exaggerated or wrong, the factual edges shaved off to make them more powerful for audiences."

Job approval:

According to Morning Consult polling, Biden maintained an approval rating above 50 percent in the first eight months of his presidency. In August 2021, it began to decline, and it reached the low forties by December. This was attributed to:
In February 2021, Gallup, Inc. reported that 98 percent of Democrats approved of Biden. As of October 2023, that number had declined to 75 percent. His approval rating among Republicans reached a high of 12 percent in February 2021 and again in July 2021.

See also: ​







Vice-President Kamala Harris, (January, 2021-?) Pictured below: V.P. Kamala Harris Official Photo as 49th Vice President of the United States
​Kamala Devi Harris (born October 20, 1964) is an American politician and attorney who is the 49th and incumbent vice president of the United States under President Joe Biden.

She is the first female vice president and the highest-ranking female official in U.S. history, as well as the first African-American and first Asian-American vice president. A member of the Democratic Party, she was previously attorney general of California from 2011 to 2017 and a U.S. senator from California from 2017 to 2021.

Born in Oakland, California, Harris graduated from Howard University and the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. She began her career in the office of the district attorney (DA) of Alameda County, before being recruited to the San Francisco DA's Office and later the City Attorney of San Francisco's office.

In 2003, she was elected DA of San Francisco. She was elected AG of California in 2010 and re-elected in 2014. Harris served as the junior U.S. senator from California from 2017 to 2021; she defeated Loretta Sanchez in the 2016 Senate election to become the second African-American woman and the first South Asian American to serve in the U.S. Senate.

As a senator, she advocated for: 
She gained a national profile for her pointed questioning of Trump administration officials during Senate hearings, including Trump's second Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, who was accused of sexual assault.

Harris sought the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, but withdrew from the race prior to the primaries. She was selected by Joe Biden to be his running mate, and their ticket went on to defeat the incumbent president and vice president, Donald Trump and Mike Pence, in the 2020 election. Harris and Biden were inaugurated on January 20, 2021.


Early life, family, and education (1964–1990):
See also: Family of Kamala Harris

Kamala Devi Harris was born in Oakland, California, on October 20, 1964. Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was a Tamil Indian biologist, whose work on the progesterone receptor gene stimulated advances in breast cancer research. 

She came to the United States from India in 1958, as a 19-year-old graduate student in nutrition and endocrinology at the University of California, Berkeley, and received her PhD in 1964. 

Kamala Harris's Jamaican American father, Donald J. Harris, is of African and Irish ancestry. He is a Stanford University professor of economics (emeritus) who arrived in the United States from British Jamaica in 1961, for graduate study at UC Berkeley, receiving a PhD in economics in 1966. 

Donald Harris met his future wife Shyamala Gopalan at a college club for African-American students (though Indian, Gopalan was allowed to join).

​In 1966, the Harris family moved to Champaign, Illinois (where Kamala's younger sister Maya was born) when her parents took positions at the University of Illinois. The family moved around the Midwest, with both parents working at multiple universities in succession over a brief period. 

Kamala Harris, along with her mother and sister, moved back to California in 1970, while her father remained in the Midwest. They stayed briefly on Milvia Street in central Berkeley, then at a duplex on Bancroft Way in West Berkeley, an area often called the "flatlands" with a significant black population. 

When Harris began kindergarten, she was bused as part of Berkeley's comprehensive desegregation program to Thousand Oaks Elementary School, a public school in a more prosperous neighborhood in northern Berkeley which previously had been 95 percent white, and after the desegregation plan went into effect became 40 percent black.

A neighbor regularly took the Harris girls to an African American church in Oakland where they sang in the children's choir, and the girls and their mother also frequently visited a nearby African American cultural center. Their mother introduced them to Hinduism and took them to a nearby Hindu temple, where Gopalan occasionally sang. 

As children, she and her sister visited their mother's family in Madras (now Chennai) several times. She says she has been strongly influenced by her maternal grandfather P. V. Gopalan, a retired Indian civil servant whose progressive views on democracy and women's rights impressed her. Harris has remained in touch with her Indian aunts and uncles throughout her adult life. Harris has also visited her father's family in Jamaica.

Her parents divorced when she was seven. Harris has said that when she and her sister visited their father in Palo Alto on weekends, other children in the neighborhood were not allowed to play with them because they were black.

When she was twelve, Harris and her sister moved with their mother to Montreal, Quebec, where Shyamala had accepted a research and teaching position at the McGill University-affiliated Jewish General Hospital.

Harris attended a French-speaking primary school, Notre-Dame-des-Neiges, then F.A.C.E. School, and finally Westmount High School in Westmount, Quebec, graduating in 1981. Wanda Kagan, a high school friend of Harris, later told CBC News in 2020 that Harris was her best friend and described how she confided in Harris that Kagan had been molested by her stepfather. She said that Harris told her mother, who then insisted Kagan come to live with them for the remainder of her final year of high school.

Kagan said Harris had recently told her that their friendship, and playing a role in countering Kagan's exploitation, helped form the commitment Harris felt in protecting women and children as a prosecutor. After high school, in 1982, Harris attended Howard University, a historically black university in Washington, D.C. While at Howard, she interned as a mailroom clerk for California senator Alan Cranston, chaired the economics society, led the debate team, and joined Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority. 

Harris graduated from Howard in 1986 with a degree in political science and economics.
Harris then returned to California to attend law school at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law through its Legal Education Opportunity Program (LEOP). 

While at UC Hastings, she served as president of its chapter of the Black Law Students Association. She graduated with a Juris Doctor in 1989 and was admitted to the California Bar in June 1990.


Early career (1990–2004):

In 1990, Harris was hired as a deputy district attorney in Alameda County, California, where she was described as "an able prosecutor on the way up". In 1994, Speaker of the California Assembly Willie Brown, who was then dating Harris, appointed her to the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later to the California Medical Assistance Commission. 

Harris took a six-month leave of absence in 1994 from her duties, then afterward resumed as prosecutor during the years she sat on the boards. Harris's connection to Brown was noted in media reportage as part of a pattern of Californian political leaders appointing "friends and loyal political soldiers" to lucrative positions on the commissions. Harris has defended her work.

In February 1998, San Francisco district attorney Terence Hallinan recruited Harris as an assistant district attorney. There, she became the chief of the Career Criminal Division, supervising five other attorneys, where she prosecuted cases, e.g.,: 
In 2000, Harris reportedly clashed with Hallinan's assistant, Darrell Salomon, over Proposition 21, which granted prosecutors the option of trying juvenile defendants in Superior Court rather than juvenile courts. Harris campaigned against the measure, which passed. Salomon opposed directing media inquiries about Prop 21 to Harris and reassigned her, a de facto demotion. Harris filed a complaint against Salomon and quit.

In August 2000, Harris took a job at San Francisco City Hall, working for city attorney Louise Renne. Harris ran the Family and Children's Services Division representing child abuse and neglect cases. Renne endorsed Harris during her D.A. campaign.

In 2001, Harris briefly dated Montel Williams. Addressing the relationship, Williams tweeted in 2020, "Kamala Harris and I briefly dated about 20 years ago when we were both single. So what? I have great respect for Sen. Harris".


District Attorney of San Francisco (2004–2011):
See also: Electoral history of Kamala Harris

In 2002, Harris prepared to run for District Attorney of San Francisco against Hallinan (the incumbent) and Bill Fazio. Harris was the least-known of the three candidates but persuaded the Central Committee to withhold its endorsement from Hallinan. Harris and Hallinan advanced to the general election runoff with 33 and 37 percent of the vote, respectively.

In the runoff, Harris pledged never to seek the death penalty and to prosecute three-strike offenders only in cases of violent felonies. Harris ran a "forceful" campaign, assisted by:
Harris differentiated herself from Hallinan by attacking his performance. She argued that she left his office because it was technologically inept, emphasizing his 52-percent conviction rate for serious crimes despite an 83-percent average conviction rate statewide. Harris charged that his office was not doing enough to stem the city's gun violence, particularly in poor neighborhoods like Bayview and the Tenderloin, and attacked his willingness to accept plea bargains in cases of domestic violence. 

Harris won with 56 percent of the vote, becoming the first person of color elected as district attorney of San Francisco.

Harris ran unopposed for a second term in November 2007.


Public safety:

Non-violent crimes
​
In the summer of 2005, Harris created an environmental crimes unit.

In 2007, Harris and city attorney Dennis Herrera investigated San Francisco supervisor Ed Jew for violating residency requirements necessary to hold his supervisor position; 

Harris charged Jew with nine felonies, alleging that he had lied under oath and falsified documents to make it appear he resided in a Sunset District home, necessary so he could run for supervisor in the 4th district. 

Jew pleaded guilty in October 2008 to unrelated federal corruption charges (mail fraud, soliciting a bribe, and extortion) and pleaded guilty the following month in state court to a charge of perjury for lying about his address on nomination forms, as part of a plea agreement in which the other state charges were dropped and Jew agreed to never again hold elected office in California. 

Harris described the case as "about protecting the integrity of our political process, which is part of the core of our democracy". For his federal offenses, Jew was sentenced to 64 months in federal prison and a $10,000 fine; for the state perjury conviction, Jew was sentenced to one year in county jail, three years' probation, and about $2,000 in fines.

Under Harris, the D.A.'s office obtained more than 1,900 convictions for marijuana offenses, including persons simultaneously convicted of marijuana offenses and more serious crimes. The rate at which Harris's office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower. 

Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses. Harris's successor as D.A., George Gascón, expunged all San Francisco marijuana offenses going back to 1975.
​​
Violent crimes:

In the early 2000s, the San Francisco murder rate per capita outpaced the national average. Within the first six months of taking office, Harris cleared 27 of 74 backlogged homicide cases by settling 14 by plea bargain and taking 11 to trial; of those trials, nine ended with convictions and two with hung juries. She took 49 violent crime cases to trial and secured 36 convictions. 

From 2004 to 2006, Harris achieved an 87-percent conviction rate for homicides and a 90-percent conviction rate for all felony gun violations.

Harris also pushed for higher bail for criminal defendants involved in gun-related crimes, arguing that historically low bail encouraged outsiders to commit crimes in San Francisco. SFPD officers credited Harris with tightening the loopholes defendants had used in the past. 

In addition to creating a gun crime unit, Harris opposed releasing defendants on their own recognizance if they were arrested on gun crimes, sought minimum 90-day sentences for possession of concealed or loaded weapons, and charged all assault weapons possession cases as felonies, adding that she would seek prison terms for criminals who possessed or used assault weapons and would seek maximum penalties on gun-related crimes.

Harris created a Hate Crimes Unit, focusing on hate crimes against LGBT children and teens in schools. In early 2006, Gwen Araujo, a 17-year-old American Latina transgender teenager, was murdered by two men who later used the "gay panic defense" before being convicted of second-degree murder.

Harris, alongside Araujo's mother Sylvia Guerrero, convened a two-day conference of at least 200 prosecutors and law enforcement officials nationwide to discuss strategies to counter such legal defenses. 

Harris subsequently supported A.B. 1160, the Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act, advocating that California's penal code include jury instructions to ignore bias, sympathy, prejudice, or public opinion in making their decision, also making mandatory for district attorney's offices in California to educate prosecutors about panic strategies and how to prevent bias from affecting trial outcomes. 

In September 2006, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed A.B. 1160 into law; the law put California on record as declaring it contrary to public policy for defendants to be acquitted or convicted of a lesser included offense on the basis of appeals to "societal bias".

In August 2007, state assemblyman Mark Leno introduced legislation to ban gun shows at the Cow Palace, joined by Harris, police chief Heather Fong, and mayor Gavin Newsom. City leaders contended the shows were directly contributing to the proliferation of illegal guns and spiking homicide rates in San Francisco. (Earlier that month Newsom had signed into law local legislation banning gun shows on city and county property.)

Leno alleged that merchants drove through the public housing developments nearby and illegally sold weapons to residents. While the bill would stall, local opposition to the shows continued until the Cow Palace Board of Directors in 2019 voted to approve a statement banning all future gun shows.

​
Reform efforts:

Death penalty:

Harris has said life imprisonment without parole is a better and more cost-effective punishment than the death penalty, and has estimated that the resultant cost savings could pay for a thousand additional police officers in San Francisco alone.

During her campaign, Harris pledged never to seek the death penalty. After a San Francisco Police Department officer, Isaac Espinoza, was shot and killed in 2004, U.S. senator (and former San Francisco mayor) Dianne Feinstein, U.S. senator Barbara Boxer, Oakland mayor Jerry Brown, and the San Francisco Police Officers Association pressured Harris to reverse that position, but she did not. 

(Polls found that seventy percent of voters supported Harris's decision.) When Edwin Ramos, an illegal immigrant and alleged MS-13 gang member, was accused of murdering a man and his two sons in 2009, Harris sought a sentence of life in prison without parole, a decision Mayor Gavin Newsom backed.

Recidivism and re-entry initiative:

In 2004, Harris recruited civil rights activist Lateefah Simon to create the San Francisco Reentry Division. The flagship program was the Back on Track initiative, a first-of-its-kind reentry program for first-time nonviolent offenders aged 18–30. 

Initiative participants whose crimes were not weapon- or gang-related would plead guilty in exchange for a deferral of sentencing and regular appearances before a judge over a twelve- to eighteen-month period.

The program maintained rigorous graduation requirements, mandating completion of up to 220 hours of community service, obtaining a high-school-equivalency diploma, maintaining steady employment, taking parenting classes, and passing drug tests. At graduation, the court would dismiss the case and expunge the graduate's record.

Over six years, the 200 people graduated from the program had a recidivism rate of less than ten percent, compared to the 53 percent of California's drug offenders who returned to prison within two years of release. Back on Track earned recognition from the U.S. Department of Justice as a model for reentry programs.

The DOJ found that the cost to the taxpayers per participant was markedly lower ($5,000) than the cost of adjudicating a case ($10,000) and housing a low-level offender ($50,000). In 2009, a state law (the Back on Track Reentry Act, A.B. 750) was enacted, encouraging other California counties to start similar programs. 

Adopted by the National District Attorneys Association as a model, prosecutor offices in Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Atlanta have used Back on Track as a template for their own programs.

Truancy initiative:

In 2006, as part of an initiative to reduce the city's skyrocketing homicide rate, Harris led a city-wide effort to combat truancy for at-risk elementary school youth in San Francisco. 

Declaring chronic truancy a matter of public safety and pointing out that the majority of prison inmates and homicide victims are dropouts or habitual truants, Harris's office met with thousands of parents at high-risk schools and sent out letters warning all families of the legal consequences of truancy at the beginning of the fall semester, adding she would prosecute the parents of chronically truant elementary students; penalties included a $2,500 fine and up to a year in jail. The program was controversial when introduced.

In 2008, Harris issued citations against six parents whose children missed at least fifty days of school, the first time San Francisco prosecuted adults for student truancy.

San Francisco's school chief, Carlos Garcia, said the path from truancy to prosecution was lengthy, and that the school district usually spends months encouraging parents through phone calls, reminder letters, private meetings, hearings before the School Attendance Review Board, and offers of help from city agencies and social services; two of the six parents entered no plea but said they would work with the D.A.'s office and social service agencies to create "parental responsibility plans" to help them start sending their children to school regularly. 

By April 2009, 1,330 elementary school students were habitual or chronic truants, down 23 percent from 1,730 in 2008, and down from 2,517 in 2007 and from 2,856 in 2006. Harris's office prosecuted seven parents in three years, with none jailed.

​
Attorney General of California (2011–2017):

Elections:
See also: Electoral history of Kamala Harris

2010
Main article: 2010 California Attorney General election

​Nearly two years before the 2010 election, Harris announced she planned to run. She also stated she would run only if then-Attorney General Jerry Brown did not seek re-election for that position. 

Brown instead chose to run for governor and Harris consolidated support from prominent California Democrats. 

Both of California's senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, United Farm Workers cofounder Dolores Huerta, and mayor of Los Angeles Antonio Villaraigosa all endorsed her during the Democratic primary. 

In the June 8, 2010, primary, she was nominated with 33.6 percent of the vote, defeating Alberto Torrico and Chris Kelly.

In the general election, she faced Republican Los Angeles County district attorney Steve Cooley, who led most of the race. Cooley ran as a nonpartisan, distancing himself from Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's campaign.

The election was held November 2 but after a protracted period of counting mail-in and provisional ballots, Cooley conceded on November 25. Harris was sworn in on January 3, 2011; she was the first woman, the first African American, and the first South Asian American to hold the office of Attorney General in the state's history.

2014
Main article: 2014 California Attorney General election

Harris announced her intention to run for re-election in February 2014 and filed paperwork to run on February 12. The Sacramento Bee, Los Angeles Daily News, and Los Angeles Times endorsed her for re-election.

On November 4, 2014, Harris was re-elected against Republican Ronald Gold, winning 57.5 percent of the vote to 42.5 percent.


Consumer protection:

Fraud, waste, and abuse

In 2011, Harris announced the creation of the Mortgage Fraud Strike Force in the wake of the 2010 United States foreclosure crisis. That same year, Harris obtained two of the largest recoveries in the history of California's False Claims Act – $241 million from Quest Diagnostics and then $323 million from the SCAN healthcare network – over excess state Medi-Cal and federal Medicare payments.
​
In 2012, Harris leveraged California's economic clout to obtain better terms in the National Mortgage Settlement against the nation's five largest mortgage servicers – JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Bank. The mortgage firms were accused of illegally foreclosing on homeowners.

After dismissing an initial offer of $2–4 billion in relief for Californians, Harris withdrew from negotiations. The offer eventually was increased to $18.4 billion in debt relief and $2 billion in other financial assistance for California homeowners.

Harris worked with Assembly speaker John Pérez and Senate president pro tem Darrell Steinberg in 2013 to introduce the Homeowner Bill of Rights, considered one of the strongest protections nationwide against aggressive foreclosure tactics. 

The Homeowner Bill of Rights banned the practices of "dual-tracking" (processing a modification and foreclosure at the same time) and robo-signing and provided homeowners with a single point of contact at their lending institution. 

Harris achieved multiple nine-figure settlements for California homeowners under the bill mostly for robo-signing and dual-track abuses, as well as prosecuting instances in which loan processors failed to promptly credit mortgage payments, miscalculated interest rates, and charged borrowers improper fees.

Harris secured hundreds of millions in relief, including $268 million from Ocwen Financial Corporation, $470 million from HSBC, and $550 million from SunTrust Banks.

From 2013 to 2015, Harris pursued financial recoveries for California's public employee and teacher's pensions, CalPERS and CalSTRS against various financial giants for misrepresentation in the sale of mortgage-backed securities. She secured multiple nine-figure recoveries for the state pensions, recovering:
In 2013, Harris declined to authorize a civil complaint drafted by state investigators who accused OneWest Bank, owned by an investment group headed by future U.S. treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin (then a private citizen), of "widespread violation" of California foreclosure laws. 

During the 2016 elections, Harris was the only Democratic Senate candidate to receive a donation from Mnuchin. Harris was criticized for accepting the donation because Mnuchin purportedly profited from the subprime mortgage crisis through OneWest Bank; she later voted against his confirmation as treasury secretary in February 2017.

In 2019, Harris's campaign stated that the decision not to pursue prosecution hinged on the state's inability to subpoena OneWest. Her spokesman said, "There was no question OneWest conducted predatory lending, and Senator Harris believes they should be punished. Unfortunately, the law was squarely on their side and they were shielded from state subpoenas because they're a federal bank."

In 2014, Harris settled charges she had brought against rent-to-own retailer Aaron's, Inc. on allegations of incorrect late charges, overcharging customers who paid off their contracts before the due date, and privacy violations.

In the settlement, the retailer refunded $28.4 million to California customers and paid $3.4 million in civil penalties.

In 2015, Harris obtained a $1.2 billion judgment against for-profit post-secondary education company Corinthian Colleges for false advertising and deceptive marketing targeting vulnerable, low-income students and misrepresenting job placement rates to students, investors, and accreditation agencies.  The Court ordered Corinthian to pay $820 million in restitution and another $350 million in civil penalties. 

That same year, Harris also secured a $60 million settlement with JP Morgan Chase to resolve allegations of illegal debt collection with respect to credit card customers, with the bank also agreeing to change practices that violated California consumer protection laws by collecting incorrect amounts, selling bad credit card debt, and running a debt-collection mill that "robo-signed" court documents without first reviewing the files as it rushed to obtain judgments and wage garnishments.

As part of the settlement, the bank was required to stop attempting to collect on more than 528,000 customer accounts.

In 2015, Harris opened an investigation of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison regarding the closure of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. California state investigators searched the home of California utility regulator Michael Peevey and found handwritten notes that allegedly showed he had met with an Edison executive in Poland, where the two had negotiated the terms of the San Onofre settlement, leaving San Diego taxpayers with a $3.3 billion bill to pay for the closure of the plant. The investigation was closed amidst Harris's 2016 run for the U.S. Senate position.

Privacy rights:

In February 2012, to mandate that apps sold in their stores display prominent privacy policies informing users of what private information they were sharing, and with whom. ​Harris announced an agreement with: 
Facebook later joined the agreement. That summer, Harris announced the creation of a Privacy Enforcement and Protection Unit to enforce laws related to cyber privacy, identity theft, and data breaches. 

Later the same year, Harris notified a hundred mobile-app developers of their non-compliance with state privacy laws and asked them to create privacy policies or face a $2,500 fine each time a non-compliant app is downloaded by a resident of California.
​
In 2015, Harris secured two settlements with Comcast,
  • one totaling $33 million over allegations that it posted online the names, phone numbers and addresses of tens of thousands of customers who had paid for unlisted voice over internet protocol (VOIP) phone service;
  • and another $26 million settlement to resolve allegations that it discarded paper records without first omitting or redacting private customer information. 

Harris also settled with Houzz over allegations that the company recorded phone calls without notifying customers or employees. Houzz was forced to pay $175,000, destroy the recorded calls, and hire a chief privacy officer, the first time such a provision has been included in a settlement with the California Department of Justice.


​Criminal justice reform:

Launch of Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry:

In November 2013, Harris launched the California Department of Justice's Division of Recidivism Reduction and Re-Entry in partnership with district attorney offices in San Diego, Los Angeles, and Alameda County. 

In March 2015, Harris announced the creation of a pilot program in coordination with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department called "Back on Track LA". Like Back on Track, first time, non-violent, non-sexual, offenders aged between 18 and 30  -- 90 men participated in the pilot program for 24–30 months.

Assigned a case manager, participants received education through a partnership with the Los Angeles Community College District and job training services.

Wrongful convictions and prison overcrowding:

Harris's record on wrongful conviction cases as attorney general has engendered criticism from academics and activists. Law professor Lara Bazelon contends Harris "weaponized technicalities to keep wrongfully convicted people behind bars rather than allow them new trials". 

After the 2011 United States Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Plata declared California's prisons so overcrowded they inflicted cruel and unusual punishment, Harris fought federal supervision, explaining "I have a client, and I don't get to choose my client." Harris declined to take any position on criminal sentencing-reform initiatives Prop 36 (2012) and Prop 47 (2014), arguing it would be improper because her office prepares the ballot booklets. John Van de Kamp, a predecessor as attorney general, publicly disagreed with the rationale.

In September 2014, Harris's office argued unsuccessfully in a court filing against the early release of prisoners, citing the need for inmate firefighting labor. When the memo provoked headlines, Harris spoke out against it, saying she was unaware that her office had produced the memo. 

Since the 1940s, qualified California inmates have the option of volunteering to receive comprehensive training from the Cal Fire in exchange for sentence reductions and more comfortable prison accommodations; prison firefighters receive about $2 a day, and another $1 when battling fires.


LGBT rights:

Opposing Prop 8
Main article: Hollingsworth v. Perry

In 2008, California voters passed Prop 8, a state constitutional amendment providing that only marriages "between a man and a woman" are valid. Legal challenges were made by opponents soon after its approval, and a pair of same-sex couples filed a lawsuit against the initiative in federal court in the case of Perry v. Schwarzenegger (later Hollingsworth v. Perry).

In their 2010 campaigns, California attorney general Jerry Brown and Harris both pledged to not defend Prop 8.

After being elected, Harris declared her office would not defend the marriage ban, leaving the task to Prop 8's proponents. In February 2013, Harris filed an amicus curiae brief, arguing Prop 8 was unconstitutional and that the initiative's sponsors did not have legal standing to represent California's interests by defending the law in federal court. 

In June 2013, the Supreme Court ruled, 5–4, that Prop 8's proponents lacked standing to defend it in federal court. The next day Harris delivered a speech in downtown Los Angeles urging the Ninth Circuit to lift the stay banning same-sex marriages as soon as possible. The stay was lifted two days later.

Gay and trans panic defense ban:

In 2014, Attorney General Kamala Harris co-sponsored legislation to ban the gay and trans panic defense in court, which passed and California became the first state with such legislation.

Michelle-Lael B. Norsworthy v. Jeffrey Beard et al.

In February 2014, Michelle-Lael Norsworthy, a transgender inmate at California's Mule Creek State Prison, filed a federal lawsuit based on the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's failure to provide her with what she argued was medically necessary sex reassignment surgery (SRS). 

In April 2015, a federal judge ordered the state to provide Norsworthy with SRS, finding that prison officials had been "deliberately indifferent to her serious medical need". 

Harris, representing CDCR, appealed the order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that psychotherapy, as well as the hormone therapy Norsworthy had been receiving for her gender dysphoria over the preceding fourteen years, were sufficient medical treatment, and there was "no evidence that Norsworthy is in serious, immediate physical or emotional danger". 

While Harris defended the state's position in court, she said she ultimately pushed the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to change their policy. 

In August 2015, while the state's appeal was pending, Norsworthy was released on parole, obviating the state's duty to provide her with inmate medical care and rendering the case moot. In 2019, Harris stated that she took "full responsibility" for briefs her office filed in Norsworthy's case and others involving access to gender-affirming surgery for trans inmates.


Public safety

Anti-truancy efforts:

​In 2011, Harris urged criminal penalties for parents of truant children as she did as District Attorney of San Francisco, allowing the court to defer judgment if the parent agreed to a mediation period to get their child back in school.

Critics charged that local prosecutors implementing her directives were overzealous in their enforcement and Harris's policy adversely affected families. 

In 2013, Harris issued a report titled "In School + On Track", which found that more than 250,000 elementary school students in the state were "chronically absent" and the statewide truancy rate for elementary students in the 2012–2013 school year was nearly thirty percent, at a cost of nearly $1.4 billion to school districts, since funding is based on attendance rates.

Environmental protection:

Harris prioritized environmental protection as attorney general, first securing a $44 million settlement to resolve all damages and costs associated with the Cosco Busan oil spill, in which a container ship collided with San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge and spilled 50,000 gallons of bunker fuel into the San Francisco Bay. 

In the aftermath of the 2015 Refugio oil spill, which deposited about 140,000 gallons of crude oil off the coast of Santa Barbara, California, Harris toured the coastline and directed her office's resources and attorneys to investigate possible criminal violations. Thereafter, operator Plains All American Pipeline was indicted on 46 criminal charges related to the spill, with one employee indicted on three criminal charges. In 2019, a Santa Barbara jury returned a verdict finding Plains guilty of failing to properly maintain its pipeline and another eight misdemeanor charges; they were sentenced to pay over $3 million in fines and assessments.

From 2015 to 2016, Harris secured multiple multi-million-dollar settlements with fuel service companies Chevron, BP, ARCO, Phillips 66, and ConocoPhillips to resolve allegations they failed to properly monitor the hazardous materials in its underground storage tanks used to store gasoline for retail sale at hundreds of California gas stations. 

In summer 2016, automaker Volkswagen AG agreed to pay up to $14.7 billion to settle a raft of claims related to so-called Defeat Devices used to cheat emissions standards on its diesel cars while actually emitting up to forty times the levels of harmful nitrogen oxides allowed under state and federal law. 

Harris and the chair of the California Air Resources Board, Mary D. Nichols, announced that California would receive $1.18 billion as well as another $86 million paid to the state of California in civil penalties.

Law enforcement:

California's Prop 69 (2004) required law enforcement to collect DNA samples from any adult arrested for a felony and from individuals arrested for certain crimes. In 2012, Harris announced that the California Department of Justice had improved its DNA testing capabilities such that samples stored at the state's crime labs could now be analyzed four times faster, within thirty days.

Accordingly, Harris reported that the Rapid DNA Service Team within the Bureau of Forensic Services had cleared California's DNA backlog for the first time). Harris's office was later awarded a $1.6 million grant from the Manhattan District Attorney's initiative to eliminate the backlogs of untested rape kits.

In 2015, Harris conducted a 90-day review of implicit bias in policing and police use of deadly force. In April 2015, Harris introduced the first of its kind "Principled Policing: Procedural Justice and Implicit Bias" training, designed in conjunction with Stanford University psychologist and professor Jennifer Eberhardt, to help law enforcement officers overcome barriers to neutral policing and rebuild trust between law enforcement and the community.

All Command-level staff received the training. The training was part of a package of reforms introduced within the California Department of Justice, which also included additional resources deployed to increase the recruitment and hiring of diverse special agents, an expanded role for the department to investigate officer-related shooting investigations and community policing. 

​The same year, Harris's California Department of Justice became the first statewide agency in the country to require all its police officers to wear body cameras. Harris also announced a new state law requiring every law enforcement agency in California to collect, report, and publish expanded statistics on how many people are shot, seriously injured or killed by peace officers throughout the state.

​Later that year, Harris appealed a judge's order to take over the prosecution of a high-profile mass murder case and to eject all 250 prosecutors from the Orange County district attorney's office over allegations of misconduct by Republican D.A. Tony Rackauckas. Rackauckas was alleged to have illegally employed jailhouse informants and concealed evidence. 

Harris noted that it was unnecessary to ban all 250 prosecutors from working on the case, as only a few had been directly involved, later promising a narrower criminal investigation.

The U.S. Department of Justice began an investigation into Rackauckas in December 2016, but he was not re-elected.

In 2016, Harris announced a patterns and practices investigation into purported civil rights violations and use of excessive force by the two largest law enforcement agencies in Kern County, California, the Bakersfield Police Department and the Kern County Sheriff's Department. 

Labeled the "deadliest police departments in America" in a five-part Guardian expose, a separate investigation commissioned by the ACLU and submitted to the California Department of Justice corroborated reports of police using excessive force.

Planned Parenthood:

In 2016, Harris's office seized videos and other information from the apartment of an antiabortion activist who had made secret recordings and then accused Planned Parenthood doctors of illegally selling fetal tissue.

Harris had announced that her office would investigate the activist in the summer of 2015. She was facing increasing criticism for not taking public action by the time Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit against the activist.

Sex crimes:

In 2011, Harris obtained a guilty plea and a four-year prison sentence from a stalker who used Facebook and social engineering techniques to illegally access the private photographs of women whose social media accounts he hijacked. Harris commented that the Internet had "opened up a new frontier for crime". 

Later that year, Harris created the eCrime Unit within the California Department of Justice, a 20-attorney unit targeting technology crimes. In 2015, several purveyors of so-called revenge porn sites based in California were arrested, charged with felonies, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms. 

In the first prosecution of its kind in the United States, Kevin Bollaert was convicted on 21 counts of identity theft and six counts of extortion and sentenced to 18 years in prison. Harris brought up these cases when California Congresswoman Katie Hill was targeted for similar cyber exploitation by her ex-husband and forced to resign in late 2019.

In 2016, Harris announced the arrest of Backpage CEO Carl Ferrer on felony charges of pimping a minor, pimping, and conspiracy to commit pimping. The warrant alleged that 99 percent of Backpage's revenue was directly attributable to prostitution-related ads, many of which involved victims of sex trafficking, including children under the age of 18. 

The pimping charge against Ferrer was dismissed by the California courts in 2016 on the grounds of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but in 2018, Ferrer pleaded guilty in California to money laundering and agreed to give evidence against the former co-owners of Backpage. 

Ferrer simultaneously pleaded guilty to charges of money laundering and conspiracy to facilitate prostitution in Texas state court and Arizona federal court. Under pressure, Backpage announced that it was removing its adult section from all its U.S. sites. 

Harris welcomed the move, saying, "I look forward to them shutting down completely." The investigations continued after she became a senator, and, in April 2018, Backpage and affiliated sites were seized by federal law enforcement.

Transnational criminal organizations:
​
During her term as attorney general, Harris's office oversaw major investigations and prosecutions targeting transnational criminal organizations for their involvement in violent crime, fraud schemes, drug trafficking, and smuggling.

Significant arrests and seizures (of weapons, drugs, cash, and other assets) under Harris targeted the following:  All were accused of operating a major money-laundering hub for Mexican narcotics traffickers (2014).

In summer 2012, Harris signed an accord with the Attorney General of Mexico, Marisela Morales, to improve coordination of law enforcement resources targeting transnational gangs engaging in the sale and trafficking of human beings across the San Ysidro border crossing.

The accord called for closer integration on investigations between offices and sharing best practices. In 2012, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law two bills advanced by Harris to combat human trafficking. 

In November, Harris presented a report titled "The State of Human Trafficking in California 2012" at a symposium attended by U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and Attorney General Morales, outlining the growing prevalence of human trafficking in the state, and highlighting the involvement of transnational gangs in the practice.

In early 2014, Harris issued a report titled, "Gangs Beyond Borders: California and the Fight Against Transnational Crime", addressing the prominent role of drug, weapons, and human trafficking, money laundering, and technology crimes employed by various drug cartels from Mexico, e.g.:
and offering recommendations for state and local law enforcement to combat the criminal activity. 

Later that year, Harris led a bipartisan delegation of state attorneys general to Mexico City to discuss transnational crime with Mexican prosecutors. Harris then convened a summit focused on the use of technology to fight transnational organized crime with state and federal officials from the U.S., Mexico, and El Salvador.


U.S. Senate (2017–2021):

Election:
Main article: 2016 United States Senate election in California

​After more than 20 years as a U.S. Senator from California, Senator Barbara Boxer announced in January 2015 that she would not run for reelection in 2016. 

Harris announced her candidacy for the Senate seat the following week Harris was a top contender from the beginning of her campaign.

The 2016 California Senate election used California's new top-two primary format where the top two candidates in the primary would advance to the general election regardless of party. 

In February 2016, Harris won 78% of the California Democratic Party vote at the party convention, allowing Harris's campaign to receive financial support from the party. 

Three months later, Governor Jerry Brown endorsed her. In the June 7 primary, Harris came in first with 40% of the vote and won with pluralities in most counties. 

Harris faced congresswoman and fellow Democrat Loretta Sanchez in the general election. It was the first time a Republican did not appear in a general election for the Senate since California began directly electing senators in 1914.

On July 19, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden endorsed Harris. 

In the November 2016 election, Harris defeated Sanchez, capturing over 60% of the vote, carrying all but four counties. Following her victory, she promised to protect immigrants from the policies of President-elect Donald Trump and announced her intention to remain Attorney General through the end of 2016.


Tenure and political positions:
See also: Political positions of Kamala Harris

2017
​
On January 28, after Trump signed Executive Order 13769, barring citizens from several Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. for ninety days, she condemned the order and was one of many to describe it as a "Muslim ban". She called White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly at home to gather information and push back against the executive order.

In February, Harris spoke in opposition to Trump's cabinet picks Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education and Jeff Sessions for United States Attorney General. In early March, she called on Sessions to resign, after it was reported that Sessions spoke twice with Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak.

​In April, Harris voted against the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court. Later that month, Harris took her first foreign trip to the Middle East, visiting California troops stationed in Iraq and the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, the largest camp for Syrian refugees.

In June, Harris garnered media attention for her questioning of Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, over the role he played in the May 2017 firing of James Comey, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

The prosecutorial nature of her questioning caused Senator John McCain, an ex officio member of the Intelligence Committee, and Senator Richard Burr, the committee chairman, to interrupt her and request that she be more respectful of the witness.

A week later, she questioned Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, on the same topic. Sessions said her questioning "makes me nervous". Burr's singling out of Harris sparked suggestions in the news media that his behavior was sexist, with commentators arguing that Burr would not treat a male Senate colleague in a similar manner.

In December, Harris called for the resignation of Senator Al Franken, asserting on Twitter, "Sexual harassment and misconduct should not be allowed by anyone and should not occur anywhere."

2018:

In January, Harris was appointed to the Senate Judiciary Committee after the resignation of Al Franken. Later that month, Harris questioned Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen for favoring Norwegian immigrants over others and claiming to be unaware that Norway is a predominantly white country.

In May, Harris heatedly questioned Secretary Nielsen about the Trump administration family separation policy, under which children were separated from their families when the parents were taken into custody for illegally entering the U.S. In June, after visiting one of the detention facilities near the border in San Diego, Harris became the first senator to demand Nielsen's resignation.
​
In the September and October Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearings, Harris questioned Brett Kavanaugh about a meeting he may have had regarding the Mueller Investigation with a member of Kasowitz Benson Torres, the law firm founded by the President's personal attorney Marc Kasowitz.

Kavanaugh was unable to answer and repeatedly deflected. Harris also participated in questioning the FBI director's limited scope of the investigation on Kavanaugh regarding allegations of sexual assault. She voted against his confirmation.

Harris was a target of the October 2018 United States mail bombing attempts.

In December, the Senate passed the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act (S. 3178), sponsored by Harris. The bill, which died in the House, would have made lynching a federal hate crime.

2019:
​​
In March 2019, after Special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election, Harris called for U.S. Attorney General William Barr to testify before Congress in the interests of transparency. 

Two days later, Barr released a four-page "summary" of the redacted Mueller Report, which was criticized as a deliberate mischaracterization of its conclusions. 

Later that month, Harris was one of twelve Democratic senators to sign a letter led by Mazie Hirono questioning Barr's decision to offer "his own conclusion that the President's conduct did not amount to obstruction of justice" and called for an investigation into whether Barr's summary of the Mueller Report and his statements at a news conference were misleading.

On May 1, 2019, Barr testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. During the hearing, Barr remained defiant about the misrepresentations in the four-page summary he had released ahead of the full report. 

When asked by Harris if he had reviewed the underlying evidence before deciding not to charge the President with obstruction of justice, Barr admitted that neither he, Rod Rosenstein, nor anyone in his office reviewed the evidence supporting the report before making the charging decision. 

Harris later called for Barr to resign, and accused him of refusing to answer her questions because he could open himself up to perjury, and stating his responses disqualified him from serving as U.S. attorney general. 

Two days later, Harris demanded again that the Department of Justice inspector general Michael E. Horowitz investigate whether Attorney General Barr acceded to pressure from the White House to investigate Trump's political enemies.

On May 5, 2019, Harris said "voter suppression" prevented Democrats Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum from winning the 2018 gubernatorial elections in Georgia and Florida; Abrams lost by 55,000 votes and Gillum lost by 32,000 votes.

According to election law expert Richard L. Hasen, "I have seen no good evidence that the suppressive effects of strict voting and registration laws affected the outcome of the governor's races in Georgia and Florida."

In July, Harris teamed with Kirsten Gillibrand to urge the Trump administration to investigate the allegations of Uyghur genocide by the Chinese Communist Party; in this question she was joined by colleague Marco Rubio.

In November, Harris called for an investigation into the death of Roxsana Hernández, a transgender woman and immigrant who died in ICE custody.

In December, Harris led a group of Democratic senators and civil rights organizations in demanding the removal of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller after emails published by the Southern Poverty Law Center revealed frequent promotion of white nationalist literature to Breitbart website editors.

2020:

Before the opening of the impeachment trial of Donald Trump on January 16, 2020, Harris delivered remarks on the floor of the Senate, stating her views on the integrity of the American justice system and the principle that nobody, including an incumbent president, is above the law.

Harris later asked Senate Judiciary chairman Lindsey Graham to halt all judicial nominations during the impeachment trial, to which Graham acquiesced. Harris voted to convict the president on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Harris has worked on bipartisan bills with Republican co-sponsors, including a bail reform bill with Senator Rand Paul, an election security bill with Senator James Lankford, and a workplace harassment bill with Senator Lisa Murkowski.

2021:

Following her election as Vice President of the United States, Harris resigned from her seat on January 18, 2021, prior to taking office on January 20, 2021, and was replaced by California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.


Committee assignments

While in the Senate, Harris was a member of the following committees: Caucus memberships:

2020 presidential election (2019–2020):

Presidential campaign:
Main article: Kamala Harris 2020 presidential campaign
​
​Harris had been considered a top contender and potential frontrunner for the 2020 Democratic nomination for president. In June 2018, she was quoted as "not ruling it out". In July 2018, it was announced that she would publish a memoir, a sign of a possible run. 

On January 21, 2019, Harris officially announced her candidacy for president of the United States in the 2020 United States presidential election. In the first 24 hours after her candidacy announcement, she tied a record set by Bernie Sanders in 2016 for the most donations raised in the day following an announcement. 

More than 20,000 people attended her formal campaign launch event in her hometown of Oakland, California, on January 27, according to a police estimate.

During the first Democratic presidential debate in June 2019, Harris scolded former vice president Joe Biden for "hurtful" remarks he made, speaking fondly of senators who opposed integration efforts in the 1970s and working with them to oppose mandatory school bussing. Harris's support rose by between six and nine points in polls following that debate. 

In the second debate in August, Harris was confronted by Biden and Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard over her record as attorney general. The San Jose Mercury News assessed that some of Gabbard's and Biden's accusations were on point, such as blocking the DNA testing of a death row inmate, while others did not stand up to scrutiny. In the immediate aftermath, Harris fell in the polls following that debate. 

Over the next few months her poll numbers fell to the low single digits. At a time when liberals were increasingly concerned about the excesses of the criminal justice system, Harris faced criticism from reformers for tough-on-crime policies she pursued while she was California's attorney general. For example, in 2014, she decided to defend California's death penalty in court.

Prior to and during her presidential campaign an online informal organization using the hashtag #KHive formed to support her candidacy and defend her from racist and sexist attacks. 

According to the Daily Dot, Joy Reid first used the term in an August 2017 tweet saying "@DrJasonJohnson @ZerlinaMaxwell and I had a meeting and decided it's called the K-Hive."

On December 3, 2019, Harris withdrew from seeking the 2020 Democratic nomination, citing a shortage of funds. In March 2020, Harris endorsed Joe Biden for president.

Vice presidential campaign:
Main articles: 
In May 2019, senior members of the Congressional Black Caucus endorsed the idea of a Biden–Harris ticket. 

In late February, Biden won a landslide victory in the 2020 South Carolina Democratic primary with the endorsement of House whip Jim Clyburn, with more victories on Super Tuesday.

In early March, Clyburn suggested Biden choose a black woman as a running mate, commenting that "African American women needed to be rewarded for their loyalty". In March, Biden committed to choosing a woman for his running mate.

On April 17, 2020, Harris responded to media speculation and said she "would be honored" to be Biden's running mate. In late May, in relation to the murder of George Floyd and ensuing protests and demonstrations, Biden faced renewed calls to select a black woman to be his running mate, highlighting the law enforcement credentials of Harris and Val Demings.

On June 12, The New York Times reported that Harris was emerging as the frontrunner to be Biden's running mate, as she was the only African American woman with the political experience typical of vice presidents. 

On June 26, CNN reported that more than a dozen people close to the Biden search process considered Harris one of Biden's top four contenders, along with Elizabeth Warren, Val Demings, and Keisha Lance Bottoms.

On August 11, 2020, Biden announced that he had chosen Harris. She was the first African American, the first Indian American, and the third woman after Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin to be picked as the vice-presidential nominee for a major party ticket. 

Harris is also the first resident of the Western United States to appear on the Democratic Party's national ticket.

Harris became the vice president–elect following the Biden-Harris ticket's victory in the 2020 United States presidential election. After the major networks called the election for Biden/Harris, Harris was recorded calling Biden, saying, "We did it! We did it, Joe. You're going to be the next President of the United States." The quote became one of the top 10 tweets of 2020.


Vice presidency (2021–present):
See also: Presidency of Joe Biden
​
Following the election of Joe Biden as U.S. president in the 2020 election, Harris assumed office as vice president of the United States on January 20, 2021. She is the United States' first female vice president, the highest-ranking female elected official in U.S. history, and the first African-American and first Asian-American vice president. 

She is also the second person of color to hold the post, preceded by Charles Curtis, a Native American and member of the Kaw Nation, who served under Herbert Hoover from 1929 to 1933. She is the third person with acknowledged non-European ancestry to reach one of the highest offices in the executive branch, after Curtis and former president Barack Obama.

​Harris resigned her Senate seat on January 18, 2021, two days before her swearing-in as vice president. Her first act as vice president was swearing in her replacement Alex Padilla and Georgia senators Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, who were elected in the 2021 Georgia runoff elections.
​
Upon taking office on January 20, 2021, the 117th Congress's Senate was divided 50–50 between Republicans and Democrats; this meant that Harris had to be frequently called upon to exercise her power to cast tie-breaking votes as president of the Senate.

Harris cast her first two tie-breaking votes on February 5, 2021. In February and March, Harris' tie-breaking votes were crucial in passing the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 stimulus package proposed by Biden, since no Republicans in the Senate voted for the package. 

On July 20, 2021, Harris broke Mike Pence's record for tie-breaking votes in the first year of a vice presidency when she cast the seventh tie-breaking vote in her first six months and cast 13 tie-breaking votes during her first year in office, the most tie-breaking votes in a single year in U.S. history, surpassing John Adams who cast 12 votes in 1790. 

On December 5, 2023, Harris broke the record for the most tie-breaking votes cast by a vice president casting her 32nd vote, exceeding John C. Calhoun, who cast 31 votes during his nearly eight years as vice president, in less then half the time.

In April 2021, Harris indicated that she was the last person in the room before Biden decided to remove all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and commented that the president has "an extraordinary amount of courage" and "make(s) decisions based on what he truly believes ... is the right thing to do." 

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that Biden "insists she be in every core decision-making meeting. She weighs in during those meetings, often providing unique perspectives."
​
On March 24, 2021, Biden tasked Harris with reducing the number of unaccompanied minors and adult asylum seekers. She is also tasked with leading the negotiations with Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. 

Harris conducted her first international trip as vice president in June 2021, visiting Guatemala and Mexico in an attempt to address the root causes of an increase in migration from Central America to the United States. During her visit, in a joint press conference with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei, Harris issued an appeal to potential migrants, stating "I want to be clear to folks in the region who are thinking about making that dangerous trek to the United States-Mexico border: Do not come. Do not come." 

Her work in Central America led to creation of task forces on corruption and human trafficking; a women's empowerment program, and an investment fund for housing and businesses.

Harris met with French President Emmanuel Macron in November 2021 to strengthen ties after the cancellation of a submarine program.

During her time in office, Harris has had one of the lowest approval ratings of any vice president in recorded history.

On November 19, 2021, Harris served as acting president from 10:10 to 11:35 am EST, while President Biden underwent a colonoscopy. She became the first woman, and the third person overall, to assume the powers and duties of the U.S. presidency under Section 3 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment.

Harris's term in office has seen high staff turnovers that included the departures of her chief of staff, deputy chief of staff, press secretary, deputy press secretary, communications director, and chief speechwriter. An anonymous source said that they resigned because they and other staffers "often feel mistreated" by senior staffers."

Symone Sanders, senior advisor and chief spokesperson for Harris, pushed back against the complaints" and defended their management style, especially for giving opportunities to black women. Sanders herself resigned from her position in December 2021

Click on any of the following blue hyperlink for more about Kamala Harris:





​
​
Democratic backsliding in the United States (1/5/2024
Pictured below: ​Countries autocratizing (red) or democratizing (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020) according to the V-Dem Institute. Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.
(Image Courtesy of  PJ Geest - Own work, data from Democracy Report 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral, page 18 (https://www.v-dem.net/static/website/files/dr/dr_2021.pdf), CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=112183341​)
[Your WebHost: note in the above global map, that the United States is highlighted in red, indicating that Americans -- by their voting choices in 2016 and potentially 2024 -- are pulling away from a truly representative democracy to become an autocracy, which today is largely a reflection of Americans who support Donald Trump as the President, first in 2016-2020, and potentially in the forthcoming 2024 presidential elections.

If Trump wins, and as further covered under the web page Presidential Elections in 2024, we will no longer have a choice of Presidents, as Trump has indicated he plans on remaining in power as "Our Dictator"!

And, do not forget that Donald Trump is a consummate liar!]







​​
Democratic backsliding in the United States
​
​Democratic backsliding in the United States has been identified as a trend at the state and national levels in various indices and analysis. Democratic backsliding is "a process of regime change towards autocracy that makes the exercise of political power more arbitrary and repressive and that restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of government selection".

The Jim Crow era is among the most-cited historical examples of democratic backsliding, with Black Americans in particular seeing their rights eroded dramatically, especially in the southern United States.

Backsliding in the 21st century has been discussed as a largely Republican-led phenomenon, with frequently-cited possible drivers include:

Jim Crow era:
Main articles:  Further information:
In the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War, the federal government of the United States initially took an active role in reducing racial discrimination. Between 1865 and 1870, three amendments were passed to address racial inequality in the South:
  1. the Thirteenth (which abolished most forms of slavery),
  2. the Fourteenth (which addressed Citizenship Rights and equal protection under the law)
  3. and the Fifteenth (which made it illegal to deny the right to vote on the basis of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude"). 

With this, the number of African American men who could vote went from 0.5% in 1866 to 70% in 1872.

By the late 1870s, however, white backlash against the social, economic and political gains of Black people (exemplified by the violence and persecution they faced from terrorist groups like the Ku Klux Klan) led to the Compromise of 1877, wherein the Democratic Party (then-dominated by Southern white supremacists) agreed to let Republicans win the 1876 presidential election, in exchange for removing federal troops in the South and, in the words of historian James M. McPherson, "the abandonment of the black man to his fate." 

Former supporters of Reconstruction era policies began to argue that the government had made "too many changes too fast", and a White conservative movement within the Republican Party started to gain influence.

What followed was an erosion of political and civil rights that would span decades; between the 1890s and 1910s, Southern governments passed Jim Crow laws, which instituted poll taxes, literacy tests and other discriminatory systems, barring many Black and impoverished White Americans from voting. 

By 1913, this disenfranchisement extended into the federal government, as the Wilson Administration introduced segregation there as well. These policies have been described as a kind of "authoritarian rule". 

It was during this time that several violent, racially-motivated events occurred, such as Wilmington insurrection of 1898 wherein a mob of armed white supremacists staged a coup d'état against the elected government of Wilmington, North Carolina, and the Tulsa race massacre in 1921, in which white supremacists (with the explicit approval of city law enforcement officials) attacked the Black neighborhood of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, killing around 300.


21st century:
See also: Election denial movement in the United States

The twenty-first century saw the erosion of voting rights and the rise of partisan gerrymandering by state legislatures. The presidency of Donald Trump accelerated the undermining of democratic norms. 

A paper published in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science said, "Trump:
  • undermined faith in elections, encouraged political violence,
  • vilified the mainstream media,
  • positioned himself as a law-and-order strongman challenging immigrants and suppressing protests,
  • and refused to denounce support from far-right groups."

In 2019, political scientists Robert R. Kaufman and Stephan Haggard saw "striking parallels in terms of democratic dysfunction, polarization, the nature of autocratic appeals, and the processes through which autocratic incumbents sought to exploit elected office" in the United States under Trump compared to other backsliding countries (Venezuela, Turkey, and Hungary). 

They argued that a change to competitive authoritarianism is possible but unlikely. In 2020, Kurt Weyland presented a qualitative model for assessing democratic continuity and reversal using historical data from the experience of other countries. His study concluded that the United States is immune to democratic reversal. 

In 2021, political scientists Matias López and Juan Pablo Luna criticized his methodology and selection of parameters and argued that both democratic continuity and reversal are possible. With regard to the state of scholarly research on the subject, they wrote that "the probability of observing democratic backsliding in the United States remains an open and important question". 

According to Jamie Gillies, Canada may reevaluate historically close Canada–United States relations in response to democratic backsliding in the U.S.

Origins;

​Political scientists including Wendy Brown and H.A. Giroux argued that the United States has been de-democratizing since the 1980's because of neoliberalism and neoconservatism. 

Some have linked the war on terror and the Iraq War as enabling later democratic backsliding under the Trump administration. Sociologist Behrouz Alikhani cited the growing political influence of the wealthy and global corporations with the loosening of campaign finance laws, especially the Citizens United decision. 

Constitutional law scholar Aziz Z. Huq agreed, adding that the inadequate democratization of national institutions since 1787 and a resurgence of authoritarian, white-ethnic identity politics also play a role. 

A number of other authors have made similar arguments, citing the Supreme Court's role in shifting political power enough to enable authoritarianism.

Gerrymandering:

The Republicans took initiative in pushing state redistricting in their favor using the results of the 2010 United States Census. They implemented the Redistricting Majority Project, or REDMAP, which was aimed to redistrict states where Republicans were in control of the district maps to push for stronger Republican representation, typically through partisan gerrymandering.

This led to the Republicans gaining control of the U.S. House by winning over 33 seats in the 2012 United States House of Representatives elections.

These new Republican-drawn district maps were met by several lawsuits challenging their validity. The Roberts Court has never struck down an election law for infringing suffrage or Equal Protection rights.

On the other hand, it struck down the Voting Rights Act pre-clearance regime in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which existed to prevent disenfranchisement by states. It has also not acted on partisan gerrymandering.

As a whole, according to Huq, these changes shift the institutional equilibrium to "enable the replication of the system of one-party dominance akin to one that characterized the American South for much of the twentieth century". However, this has not always been the norm.

In June 2023, the court ruled 5–4 to uphold rulings of the lower court which used Voting Rights Act of 1965 to instruct the state of Alabama to draw a second majority-black congressional district, which was hailed as a win for voting rights advocates. 

The court ruled 6–3 that state courts can adjudicate matters related to federal elections held in their state and the North Carolina Supreme Court was allowed to adjudicate whether the congressional map drawn by the North Carolina Legislature complied with the state constitution, because the United States Constitution "does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review."

The court rejected the Independent state legislature theory, which contended that state legislatures have "effectively unchecked authority" to draw maps according to their wishes.

Supreme Court:
See also: Supreme Court of the United States § Criticism and controversies

Upon Trump's victory in the 2016 United States presidential election, the Federalist Society (FedSoc) played a major role in vetting candidates for the president to appoint to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. 

The Federalist Society, a conservative-libertarian group that advocates a textualist and originalist interpretation of the United States Constitution, had for decades helped law students and attorneys with federal judgeships, under the leadership of Leonard Leo. 

After Trump appointed three justices who were current or former FedSoc members, the Roberts Court had a 6–3 majority of such FedSoc justices.

The court's 2021 term was widely characterized as one of its most consequential, as it ruled in favor of major issues sought by conservatives for decades, such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which had overturned Roe v. Wade with the judgement that the right to abortion was not a constitutional right, allowing states to set their own regulations to allow or deny abortions. 

In a July 2022 research paper entitled "The Supreme Court's Role in the Degradation of U.S. Democracy," the Campaign Legal Center, founded by Republican Trevor Potter, concluded that the Roberts Court "has turned on our democracy" and was on an "anti-democratic crusade" that had "accelerated and become increasingly extreme with the arrival" of Trump's three appointees.

Election subversion:
Main articles: 
By 2020, most state legislatures were controlled by the Republican Party, though some of those states had Democratic governors. As part of attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election, many Republican legislators in seven battleground states won by Joe Biden created fraudulent certificates of ascertainment composed of "alternate electors" to declare Donald Trump had actually won their states, thereby overruling the will of voters.

They hoped to pass these fraudulent certificates to vice president Mike Pence on January 6, 2021, so he would reverse Biden's election and certify Trump as the winner, a scheme which became known as the Pence Card.

Pence instead counted the authentic slates of electors and properly declared Biden the victor. By June 2022, participants in the alternate electors scheme began receiving subpoenas from the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack and the United States Department of Justice. 

Investigations into a Trump fake electors plot ensued.

Leonard Leo is also involved with the Honest Elections Project (HEP), a major proponent of the independent state legislature theory (ISL), which asserts that a textualist or originalist reading of the Constitution grants state legislatures exclusive authority to establish and enforce state election rules for federal elections, unfettered by oversight from state courts or governors.

This interpretation was contrary to previous interpretations of the Constitution, which held that legislatures, courts and governors shared that authority. Critics said that if the ISL was adopted, it would be possible for state legislatures controlled by one party to establish and enforce election rules to suit their partisan objectives, including rejecting certain ballots or procedures to overrule the voting majority in federal elections and declare their party candidates the winners.

The only restriction of this authority would be the Electoral Count Act, which requires governors to certify their states' election results; after the 2020 presidential election, the Act was found to have a flaw that Trump attorney John Eastman sought to exploit to advance his Pence Card scheme.

HEP had for years submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court advocating the ISL. In June 2022, the Court agreed to hear Moore v. Harper, a case brought by the North Carolina Republican Party, during its next term beginning October 2022.

At least four justices had previously signaled support for using the case to rule in favor of ISL. J. Michael Luttig, a former federal appeals court judge who is highly regarded in conservative legal circles, remarked, "Trump and the Republicans can only be stopped from stealing the 2024 election at this point if the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature doctrine ... and Congress amends the Electoral Count Act to constrain Congress' own power to reject state electoral votes and decide the presidency." 

He testified weeks later during a January 6 committee hearing that "Donald Trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to American democracy."

The Supreme Court rejected ISL in a 6–3 decision in June 2023.

Restrictions on voting:
Main articles:  See also: 
Despite extensive research over decades finding that voting fraud is extremely rare, many Republicans assert it is widespread and that actions must be taken to prevent it.

Amid persistent false allegations that widespread fraud had led to Trump's 2020 election loss, in 2021 Republicans in multiple states began taking actions to gain control of state and county election apparatuses, limit ballot access and challenge votes.

By June, Republicans had introduced at least 216 bills in 41 states to give legislatures more power over elections officials. Republican lawmakers had stripped authority from secretaries of state, who oversee state elections.

  • In Georgia, Republicans removed Democrats of color from local election boards.
  • In Arkansas, they stripped election control from county authorities.
  • Wisconsin Republicans, led by senator Ron Johnson, sought to dismantle the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission, which the party had created five years earlier.
  • In Michigan and other swing states, Republicans sought to create an "army" of poll workers and attorneys who could refer what they deemed questionable ballots to a network of friendly district attorneys to challenge.

Through May 2022, Republican voters had nominated at least 108 candidates, in some 170 midterm races, who had repeated Trump's stolen election lies; at least 149 had campaigned on tightening voting procedures, despite the lack of evidence of widespread fraud. Dozens of these nominees sought offices to oversee the administration and certification of elections.

Anti-democratic tendencies:
See also: 
By 2021, polling and research indicated a significant shift against democracy among Republicans, both in terms of rhetoric and acceptance of potential political violence. The shift was most pronounced among Republicans who trusted Fox News, and more so Newsmax and One America News (OAN), who were more inclined to believe the disproven assertion that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen from Trump.

A November 2021 Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) poll found that two-thirds of Republicans believed the election had been stolen, as did 82 percent of those who trusted Fox News more than any other media outlet.

Ninety-seven percent of those who trusted Newsmax and OAN believed the election was stolen. Thirty percent of Republicans agreed with the statement, "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country," rising to 40 percent among those who trust Newsmax and OAN; eleven percent of Democrats agreed.

Robert Jones, CEO of PRRI, said he was deeply concerned about the poll findings and "we really have to take them seriously as a threat to democracy."

Political scientist John Pitney, who was previously a domestic policy and legislative aide for congressional Republicans, remarked, "Back in the 1980s, Republicans aspired to be the party of hope and opportunity. Now it is the party of blood and soil. The culture war is front and center, and for many Republicans, it is close to being a literal war, not just a metaphorical one."

Political scientist Larry Bartels, a co-director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions at Vanderbilt University, wrote in August 2020 that "substantial numbers of Republicans endorse statements contemplating violations of key democratic norms, including respect for the law and for the outcomes of elections and eschewing the use of force in pursuit of political ends."

He ascribed the primary cause to "ethnic antagonism" among Republicans toward immigrants and minorities seeking political power and claims on government resources.

A survey between 2017 and 2019 found a third of Americans want a "strong leader who doesn't have to bother with Congress or elections", and one-quarter had a favorable view of military rule. 

A research study administered in 2019 found Trump supporters were more likely to condone executive aggrandizement, while Republicans were more likely to support a candidate who suspends Congress or ignores court verdicts.

Religious and white nationalism:
See also: Great Replacement conspiracy theory in the United States

During the Trump era, a far-right, populist movement based on Christian nationalism surged, gaining some degree of mainstream acceptance. The ideology of Trumpism broadly adheres to a deeply-held belief that America was founded as a Christian nation. Philip Gorski, a Yale professor of the sociology of religion, calls this "a mythological version of American history."

Movement adherents believe their Christian dominance has been usurped by other races and faiths, which Gorski characterizes as a form of racial tribalism: a "'we don't like people who are trying to change [our country] or people who are different' form of nationalism." 

Multiple studies have found that support for democracy among white Americans is negatively correlated with their level of racial prejudice, resentment, and desire to maintain white power and status.

Researchers have observed that many in the movement seek to reduce or eliminate the separation of church and state found in the Constitution. Some also believe Trump was divinely chosen to save white Christian America.

In their 2022 book, The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy, Gorski and co-author Samuel Perry, a professor of religious studies at the University of Oklahoma, wrote that white Christian nationalists share a set of common anti-democratic beliefs and principles that "add up to a political vision that privileges the tribe. And they seek to put other tribes in their proper place."

Some believe in a "Warrior Christ" they will follow with the use of righteous violence. During a September 2020 presidential debate, Trump was asked if he would condemn white supremacists and militia groups that had appeared at some protests that year.

After his opponent Joe Biden mentioned Proud Boys, Trump stated, "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," adding "somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem."

After Trump and his allies exhausted legal avenues to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, several leaders of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were indicted and convicted on federal seditious conspiracy charges for their roles in the January 6 United States Capitol attack on the Capitol as Congress assembled to certify Biden's election.

The Department of Homeland Security stated in October 2020 that white supremacists posed the top domestic terrorism threat, which FBI director Christopher Wray confirmed in March 2021, noting that the bureau had elevated the threat to the same level as ISIS.

The release of the DHS findings had been delayed for months, which a whistleblower, the department's acting intelligence chief Brian Murphy, attributed to reluctance of DHS leaders to release information that would reflect poorly on the president in an election year.

Every Republican voted against a July 2022 House measure requiring Homeland Security, the FBI and the Defense Department to "publish a report that analyzes and sets out strategies to combat white supremacist and neo-Nazi activity" in their ranks.

A 2019 survey of active service members found that about one third had "personally witnessed examples of white nationalism or ideological-driven racism within the ranks in recent months." About one fifth of those who were charged for participating in the January 6 attack were veterans, with some on active service.

Rachel Kleinfeld, a scholar of global political violence and democracy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, found in July 2022 that Trump's affinity for far-right militia groups dated to his 2016 campaign and such groups had since become increasingly mainstreamed in the Republican Party.

She argued the militia influence had spread since the January 6 attack among Republican leaders at the national, state, and local level. Political scientist Barbara Walter, who has studied political violence leading to civil war, commented in March 2022 that "There are definitely lots of groups on the far right who want war. They are preparing for war ... We know the warning signs. And we know that if we strengthen our democracy, and if the Republican Party decides it's no longer going to be an ethnic faction that's trying to exclude everybody else, then our risk of civil war will disappear."

Reactions:

In September 2023, thirteen presidential centers dating from Herbert Hoover to Barack Obama released an unprecedented joint message warning of the fragile state of American democracy. The statement called for a recommitment to the rule of law and civility in political discourse, as well as respect for democratic institutions and secure and accessible elections.

President Joe Biden warned of threats to democracy during addresses in 2022 and 2023 At a fundraiser in August 2022, Biden said Donald Trump's MAGA philosophy was "like semi-fascism." 

In September 2023, weeks after Trump had been indicted on federal and state charges related to his attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election, and as most Republicans still refused to accept Trump's 2020 election loss, Biden said:
"There's something dangerous happening in America now. There's an extremist movement that does not share the basic beliefs of our democracy: The MAGA movement. There's no question that today's Republican Party is driven and intimidated by MAGA Republican extremists. Their extreme agenda, if carried out, would fundamentally alter the institutions of American democracy as we know it".

Hillary Clinton, whom Trump defeated in 2016, said in October 2023 that Trump was likely to be the 2024 Republican presidential nominee and if elected "will wreck our democracy," likening his MAGA supporters to a "cult."


Indicators:

National indices:

Freedom House downgraded the United States's score significantly in their civil rights and political liberties index between 2010 (94) and 2020 (83), citing the need for 3 main reforms:
  1. removing barriers to voting,
  2. limiting the influence of money in politics,
  3. and establishing independent redistricting commissions.

The Economist Democracy Index started the U.S. at the index's launch in 2006 at an 8.22/10 (full democracy) though the rating started declining in 2010 and dropped to its lowest rating yet of 7.85 in 2021 (flawed democracy 

The Economist cited functioning of government and political culture as major reasons for the lower score (both related to polarization).

The V-Dem Democracy indices show significant declines from 2016 to 2020. V-dem has measures on democracy starting in 1789, providing rare historical data to compare backsliding events, though comparing across centuries is not without its challenges.

International IDEA labeled the US a "backsliding democracy" after evaluating 2020 and 2021 events, including January 6 and a poorly-functioning legislature. IDEA's democracy scores started sliding for the United States in 2016.

State Democracy Index:

Jacob Grumbach published the State Democracy Index which evaluates states between 2000 and 2018 on the strength of their electoral democracy. While starting in 2002 and accelerating after the 2010 elections and redistricting, Grumbach finds American states under unified Republican Party control began significant backsliding, while Democratic Party-controlled and divided states have become more democratic. 

Grumbach found Alabama, Tennessee, Ohio, Wisconsin, and North Carolina were the worst performers (with Wisconsin and North Carolina previously ranking at the top), and suggested a sense of racial threat was one of the main drivers in these states with larger black populations becoming more anti-democratic. 

Grumbach also cites economic inequality, the nationalization of state politics through declining journalism and an increase in national donors as contributors of backsliding. While he notes it would be difficult to compare across eras, he believes that the slavery and Jim Crow eras in particular had far greater gaps in the quality of democracy between states than the present day gaps he analyzes and notes that the US, in the eyes of some, was not a democracy until 1964.

Public opinion:

Bright Line surveys from the University of Chicago have taken frequent measurements on attitudes around democracy in the US from political scientists and a representative sample of the public, and have shown democratic decline consistent with V-dem and the Economist Democracy Index.

A 2022 Quinnipiac University poll found that 69 percent of Democrats and Republicans and 66 percent of Independents think American democracy is "in danger of collapse".


See also:







Constitution of the United States​​Pictured below:  ​Constitution of the United States of America | Definition, Summary, Amendments, Analysis, Importance, & Facts | Britannica
The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States. It superseded the Articles of Confederation, the nation's first constitution, on March 4, 1789. Originally including seven articles, the Constitution delineates the frame of the federal government.

The Constitution's first three articles embody the doctrine of the separation of powers, in which the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress (Article I); the executive, consisting of the president and subordinate officers (Article II); and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts (Article III). 

Article IV, Article V, and Article VI embody concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments, the states in relationship to the federal government, and the shared process of constitutional amendment. Article VII establishes the procedure subsequently used by the 13 states to ratify it.

The Constitution of the United States is the oldest and longest-standing written and codified national constitution in force in the world.

The drafting of the Constitution, often referred to as its framing, was completed at the Constitutional Convention, which assembled at Independence Hall in Philadelphia between May 25 and September 17, 1787.

Delegates to the convention were chosen by the state legislatures of 12 of the 13 original states; Rhode Island refused to send delegates. 

The convention's initial mandate was limited to amending the Articles of Confederation, which had proven highly ineffective in meeting the young nation's needs. 

Almost immediately, however, delegates began considering measures to replace the Articles. The first proposal discussed, introduced by delegates from Virginia, called for a bicameral (two-house) Congress that was to be elected on a proportional basis based on state population, an elected chief executive, and an appointed judicial branch. 

An alternative to the Virginia Plan, known as the New Jersey Plan, also called for an elected executive but retained the legislative structure created by the Articles, a unicameral Congress where all states had one vote.

On June 19, 1787, delegates rejected the New Jersey Plan with three states voting in favor, seven against, and one divided. The plan's defeat led to a series of compromises centering primarily on two issues: slavery and proportional representation. 

The first of these pitted Northern states, where slavery was slowly being abolished, against Southern states, whose agricultural economies depended on slave labor. The issue of proportional representation was of similar concern to less populous states, which under the Articles had the same power as larger states. 

To satisfy interests in the South, particularly in Georgia and South Carolina, the delegates agreed to protect the slave trade, that is, the importation of slaves, for 20 years. Slavery was protected further by allowing states to count three-fifths of their slaves as part of their populations, for the purpose of representation in the federal government, and by requiring the return of escaped slaves to their owners, even if captured in states where slavery had been abolished. 

Finally, the delegates adopted the Connecticut Compromise, which proposed a Congress with proportional representation in the lower house and equal representation in the upper house (the Senate) giving each state two senators. 

While these compromises held the Union together and aided the Constitution's ratification, slavery continued for six more decades and the less populous states continue to have disproportional representation in the U.S. Senate and Electoral College.

Since the Constitution became operational in 1789, it has been amended 27 times. The first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, offer specific protections of individual liberty and justice and place restrictions on the powers of government within the U.S. states. 

The majority of the 17 later amendments expand individual civil rights protections. Others address issues related to federal authority or modify government processes and procedures. Amendments to the United States Constitution, unlike ones made to many constitutions worldwide, are appended to the document.

The original U.S. Constitution was handwritten on five pages of parchment by Jacob Shallus. The first permanent constitution, it is interpreted, supplemented, and implemented by a large body of federal constitutional law and has influenced the constitutions of other nations.


Background:
See also: History of the United States Constitution

First government:

From September 5, 1774, to March 1, 1781, the Second Continental Congress, convened in Philadelphia in what today is called Independence Hall, functioned as the provisional government of the United States.

Delegates to the First Continental Congress in 1774 and then the Second Continental Congress from 1775 to 1781 were chosen largely from the revolutionary committees of correspondence in various colonies rather than through the colonial governments of the Thirteen Colonies.

Articles of Confederation:
Main article: Articles of Confederation

The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was the first constitution of the United States. The document was drafted by a committee appointed by the Second Continental Congress in mid-June 1777 and was adopted by the full Congress in mid-November of that year.

Ratification by the 13 colonies took more than three years and was completed March 1, 1781. The Articles gave little power to the central government. While the Confederation Congress had some decision-making abilities, it lacked enforcement powers. The implementation of most decisions, including amendments to the Articles, required legislative approval by all 13 of the newly formed states.

Despite these limitations, based on the Congressional authority granted in Article 9, the league of states was considered as strong as any similar republican confederation ever formed. The chief problem was, in the words of George Washington, "no money."

The Confederated Congress could print money, but it was worthless, and while the Congress could borrow money, it could not pay it back.

No state paid its share of taxes to support the government, and some paid nothing. A few states did meet the interest payments toward the national debt owed by their citizens, but nothing greater, and no interest was paid on debts owed foreign governments. By 1786, the United States was facing default on its outstanding debts.

Under the Articles, the United States had little ability to defend its sovereignty. Most of the troops in the nation's 625-man army were deployed facing non-threatening British forts on American soil. Soldiers were not being paid, some were deserting, and others were threatening mutiny. 

Spain closed New Orleans to American commerce, despite the protests of U.S. officials. When Barbary pirates began seizing American ships of commerce, the Treasury had no funds to pay toward ransom. If a military crisis required action, the Congress had no credit or taxing power to finance a response.

Domestically, the Articles of Confederation was failing to bring unity to the diverse sentiments and interests of the various states. Although the Treaty of Paris in 1783 was signed between Britain and the U.S., and named each of the American states, various states proceeded to violate it. New York and South Carolina repeatedly prosecuted Loyalists for wartime activity and redistributed their lands.

Individual state legislatures independently laid embargoes, negotiated directly with foreign authorities, raised armies, and made war, all violating the letter and the spirit of the Articles.

In September 1786, during an inter–state convention to discuss and develop a consensus about reversing the protectionist trade barriers that each state had erected, James Madison questioned whether the Articles of Confederation was a binding compact or even a viable government. Connecticut paid nothing and "positively refused" to pay U.S. assessments for two years. 

A rumor at the time was that a seditious party of New York legislators had opened a conversation with the Viceroy of Canada. To the south, the British were said to be openly funding Creek Indian raids on Georgia, and the state was under martial law. 

Additionally, during Shays' Rebellion (August 1786 – June 1787) in Massachusetts, Congress could provide no money to support an endangered constituent state. General Benjamin Lincoln was obliged to raise funds from Boston merchants to pay for a volunteer army.

Congress was paralyzed. It could do nothing significant without nine states, and some legislation required all 13. When a state produced only one member in attendance, its vote was not counted. If a state's delegation was evenly divided, its vote could not be counted towards the nine-count requirement. 

The Congress of the Confederation had "virtually ceased trying to govern." The vision of a respectable nation among nations seemed to be fading in the eyes of revolutionaries such as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Rufus King. Their dream of a republic, a nation without hereditary rulers, with power derived from the people in frequent elections, was in doubt.

On February 21, 1787, the Confederation Congress called a convention of state delegates in Philadelphia to propose revisions to the Articles. Unlike earlier attempts, the convention was not meant for new laws or piecemeal alterations, but for the "sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation."

The convention was not limited to commerce; rather, it was intended to "render the federal constitution adequate to the exigencies of government and the preservation of the Union."

The proposal might take effect when approved by Congress and the states.


History:
For a chronological guide, see Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution.

1787 drafting:
Main articles: Constitutional Convention (United States) and James Madison as Father of the Constitution
​Map Below: ​Dates the 13 original U.S. states ratified the Constitution
On the appointed day, May 14, 1787, only the Virginia and Pennsylvania delegations were present, and the convention's opening meeting was postponed for lack of a quorum. 

A quorum of seven states met on May 25, and deliberations began. Eventually 12 states were represented, with Rhode Island refusing to participate. Of the 74 delegates appointed by the states, 55 attended. 

The delegates were generally convinced that an effective central government with a wide range of enforceable powers must replace the weaker Congress established by the Articles of Confederation.

Two plans for structuring the federal government arose at the convention's outset:
  • The Virginia Plan, also known as the Large State Plan or the Randolph Plan, proposed that the legislative department of the national government be composed of a Bicameral Congress, with both chambers elected with apportionment according to population. Generally favoring the most highly populated states, it used the philosophy of John Locke to rely on consent of the governed, Montesquieu for divided government, and Edward Coke to emphasize civil liberties.
  • The New Jersey Plan proposed that the legislative department be a unicameral body with one vote per state. Generally favoring the less-populous states, it used the philosophy of English Whigs such as Edmund Burke to rely on received procedure and William Blackstone to emphasize sovereignty of the legislature. This position reflected the belief that the states were independent entities and, as they entered the United States of America freely and individually, remained so.

On May 31, the Convention devolved into the Committee of the Whole, charged with considering the Virginia Plan. On June 13, the Virginia resolutions in amended form were reported out of committee. The New Jersey Plan was put forward in response to the Virginia Plan.

A Committee of Eleven, including one delegate from each state represented, met from July 2 to 16 to work out a compromise on the issue of representation in the federal legislature.

All agreed to a republican form of government grounded in representing the people in the states. For the legislature, two issues were to be decided: how the votes were to be allocated among the states in the Congress, and how the representatives should be elected. In its report, now known as the Connecticut Compromise (or "Great Compromise"), the committee proposed proportional representation for seats in the House of Representatives based on population (with the people voting for representatives), and equal representation for each State in the Senate (with each state's legislators generally choosing their respective senators), and that all money bills would originate in the House.

The Great Compromise ended the stalemate between patriots and nationalists, leading to numerous other compromises in a spirit of accommodation. There were sectional interests to be balanced by the Three-Fifths Compromise; reconciliation on Presidential term, powers, and method of selection; and jurisdiction of the federal judiciary.

On July 24, a Committee of Detail, including the following was elected to draft a detailed constitution reflective of the resolutions passed by the convention up to that point:
The Convention recessed from July 26 to August 6 to await the report of this "Committee of Detail". Overall, the report of the committee conformed to the resolutions adopted by the convention, adding some elements. A twenty-three article (plus preamble) constitution was presented.

From August 6 to September 10, the report of the committee of detail was discussed, section by section and clause by clause. Details were attended to, and further compromises were effected. 

Toward the close of these discussions, on September 8, a Committee of Style and Arrangement was appointed to distill a final draft constitution from the 23 approved articles., including: 
The final draft, presented to the convention on September 12, contained seven articles, a preamble and a closing endorsement, of which Morris was the primary author. The committee also presented a proposed letter to accompany the constitution when delivered to Congress.

The final document, engrossed by Jacob Shallus, was taken up on Monday, September 17, at the convention's final session. Several of the delegates were disappointed in the result, a makeshift series of unfortunate compromises. Some delegates left before the ceremony and three others refused to sign.

Of the thirty-nine signers, Benjamin Franklin summed up, addressing the convention: "There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them." He would accept the Constitution, "because I expect no better and because I am not sure that it is not the best."

The advocates of the Constitution were anxious to obtain unanimous support of all twelve states represented in the convention. Their accepted formula for the closing endorsement was "Done in Convention, by the unanimous consent of the States present." At the end of the convention, the proposal was agreed to by eleven state delegations and the lone remaining delegate from New York, Alexander Hamilton.

Ratification by the states:
Further information:  ​
​Within three days of its signing on September 17, 1787, the Constitution was submitted to the Congress of the Confederation, then sitting in New York City, the nation's temporary capital. The document, originally intended as a revision of the Articles of Confederation, instead introduced a completely new form of government. 

While members of Congress had the power to reject it, they voted unanimously on September 28 to forward the proposal to the thirteen states for their ratification. Under the process outlined in Article VII of the proposed Constitution, the state legislatures were tasked with organizing "Federal Conventions" to ratify the document.

This process ignored the amendment provision of the Articles of Confederation which required unanimous approval of all the states. Instead, Article VII called for ratification by just nine of the 13 states—a two-thirds majority.

Two factions soon emerged, one supporting the Constitution, the Federalists, and the other opposing it, the so-called Anti-Federalists. Over the ensuing months, the proposal was debated, criticized, and expounded upon clause by clause. In the state of New York, at the time a hotbed of anti-Federalism, three delegates from the Philadelphia Convention who were also members of the Congress--Hamilton, Madison, and Jay—published a series of commentaries, now known as The Federalist Papers, in support of ratification.

Before year's end, three state legislatures voted in favor of ratification. Delaware was first, voting unanimously 30–0; Pennsylvania second, approving the measure 46–23; and New Jersey third, also recording a unanimous vote. 

As 1788 began, Connecticut and Georgia followed Delaware's lead with almost unanimous votes, but the outcome became less certain as leaders in key states such as Virginia, New York, and Massachusetts expressed concerns over the lack of protections for people's rights. 

Fearing the prospect of defeat, the Federalists relented, promising that if the Constitution was adopted, amendments would be added to secure individual liberties. With that, the anti-Federalists' position collapsed.

On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify. Three months later, on September 17, the Congress of the Confederation certified the ratification of eleven states, and passed resolutions setting dates for choosing the first senators and representatives, the first Wednesday of January (January 7, 1789); electing the first president, the first Wednesday of February (February 4); and officially starting the new government, the first Wednesday of March (March 4), when the first Congress would convene in New York City. 

As its final act, the Congress of Confederation agreed to purchase 10 square miles from Maryland and Virginia for establishing a permanent capital.

North Carolina waited to ratify the Constitution until after the Bill of Rights was passed by the new Congress, and Rhode Island's ratification would only come after a threatened trade embargo.


Influences:
Further information: History of the United States Constitution

​The U.S. Constitution was a federal one and was greatly influenced by the study of Magna Carta and other federations, both ancient and extant. The Due Process Clause of the Constitution was partly based on common law and on Magna Carta (1215), which had become a foundation of English liberty against arbitrary power wielded by a ruler. 

The idea of Separation of Powers inherent in the Constitution was largely inspired by eighteenth-century Enlightenment philosophers, such as Montesquieu and John Locke.

The influence of Montesquieu, Locke, Edward Coke and William Blackstone were evident at the Constitutional Convention. Prior to and during the framing and signing of the Constitution, Blackstone, Hume, Locke and Montesquieu were among the political philosophers most frequently referred to. 

Historian Herbert W. Schneider held that the Scottish Enlightenment was "probably the most potent single tradition in the American Enlightenment" and the advancement of personal liberties. 

Historian Jack P. Greene maintains that by 1776 the founders drew heavily upon Magna Carta and the later writings of "Enlightenment rationalism" and English common law.

Historian Daniel Walker Howe notes that Benjamin Franklin greatly admired David Hume, an eighteenth-century Scottish philosopher, and had studied many of his works while at Edinburgh in 1760. Both embraced the idea that high-ranking public officials should receive no salary and that the lower class was a better judge of character when it came to choosing their representatives.

In his Institutes of the Lawes of England, Coke interpreted Magna Carta protections and rights to apply not just to nobles, but to all British subjects. In writing the Virginia Charter of 1606, he enabled the King in Parliament to give those to be born in the colonies all rights and liberties as though they were born in England.

William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England are considered the most influential books on law in the new republic. Madison made frequent reference to Blackstone, Locke, and Montesquieu, all of whom were among the most prominent political theorists of the late eighteenth century.

Following the Glorious Revolution of 1688, British political philosopher John Locke was a major influence, expanding on the contract theory of government advanced by Thomas Hobbes, his contemporary. Locke advanced the principle of consent of the governed in his Two Treatises of Government.

Government's duty under a social contract among the sovereign people was to serve the people by protecting their rights. These basic rights were life, liberty, and property.

Montesquieu's influence on the framers is evident in Madison's Federalist No. 47 and Hamilton's Federalist No. 78. Jefferson, Adams, and Mason were known to read Montesquieu. 

Supreme Court Justices, the ultimate interpreters of the constitution, have cited Montesquieu throughout the Court's history. (See, e.g., 
Montesquieu emphasized the need for balanced forces pushing against each other to prevent tyranny (reflecting the influence of Polybius's 2nd century BC treatise on the checks and balances of the Roman Republic).

In his The Spirit of Law, Montesquieu maintained that the separation of state powers should be by its service to the people's liberty: legislative, executive and judicial, while also emphasizing that the idea of separation had for its purpose the even distribution of authority among the several branches of government.

The English Bill of Rights (1689) was an inspiration for the American Bill of Rights. Both require jury trials, contain a right to keep and bear arms, prohibit excessive bail and forbid "cruel and unusual punishments". Many liberties protected by state constitutions and the Virginia Declaration of Rights were incorporated into the Bill of Rights. 

Upon the arrival of the American Revolution, many of the rights guaranteed by the Federal Bill of Rights were recognized as being inspired by English law. A substantial body of thought had been developed from the literature of republicanism in the United States, typically demonstrated by the works of John Adams, who often quoted Blackstone and Montesquieu verbatim, and applied to the creation of state constitutions.

While the ideas of unalienable rights, the separation of powers and the structure of the Constitution were largely influenced by the European Enlightenment thinkers, like Montesquieu, John Locke and others, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson still had reservations about the existing forms of government in Europe. 

In a speech at the Constitutional Convention Franklin stated, "We have gone back to ancient history for models of Government, and examined different forms of those Republics ... And we have viewed modern States all round Europe but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances." 

Jefferson maintained, that most European governments were autocratic monarchies and not compatible with the egalitarian character of the American people. In a 1787 letter to John Rutledge, Jefferson asserted that "The only condition on earth to be compared with [American government] ... is that of the Indians, where they still have less law than we."

In that same letter, Jefferson maintained that American government, with its Native American features, marked a great improvement over the European models.

American Indian history scholars Donald Grinde and Bruce Johansen claim there is "overwhelming evidence" that Iroquois Confederacy political concepts and ideas influenced the U.S. Constitution, and are considered to be the most outspoken supporters of the Iroquois thesis. 

The idea as to the extent of that influence on the founding, however, varies among historians and has been questioned or criticized by various historians, including Samuel Payne, 

William Starna, George Hamell, and historian and archaeologist Philip Levy, who claims the evidence is largely coincidental and circumstantial. The most outspoken critic, anthropologist Elisabeth Tooker, claimed the Iroquois influence thesis is largely the product of "white interpretations of Indians" and "scholarly misapprehension".

The laws of the Iroquois Confederacy were familiar to founders like James Monroe, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, and is said to have influenced their thinking during the founding era to one degree or another. 

John Napoleon Brinton Hewitt, who was born on the Tuscarora Indian Reservation, and was an ethnologist at the Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of Ethnology is often cited by historians of Iroquois history. Hewitt, however, rejected the idea that the Iroquois League had a major influence on the Albany Plan of Union, Benjamin Franklin's plan to create a unified government for the Thirteen Colonies, which was rejected.


Constitution's provisions:

The Constitution includes four sections: an introductory paragraph titled Preamble, a list of seven Articles that define the government's framework, an untitled closing endorsement with the signatures of 39 framers, and 27 amendments that have been adopted under Article V (see below).

Preamble:
Main article: Preamble to the United States Constitution:

The Preamble, the Constitution's introductory paragraph, lays out the purposes of the new government:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The opening words, "We the People", represented a new thought: the idea that the people and not the states were the source of the government's legitimacy.

Coined by Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, who chaired the convention's Committee of Style, the phrase is considered an improvement on the section's original draft which followed the words We the People with a list of the 13 states. 

In place of the names of the states Morris substituted "of the United States" and then listed the Constitution's six goals, none of which were mentioned originally.

Articles:

The Constitution's main provisions include seven articles that define the basic framework of the federal government. Articles that have been amended still include the original text, although provisions repealed by amendments under Article V are usually bracketed or italicized to indicate they no longer apply. Despite these changes, the focus of each Article remains the same as when adopted in 1787.

Article I – The Legislature
Main article: Article One of the United States Constitution

Article I describes the Congress, the legislative branch of the federal government. Section 1 reads, "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

The article establishes the manner of election and the qualifications of members of each body. Representatives must be at least 25 years old, be a citizen of the United States for seven years, and live in the state they represent. Senators must be at least 30 years old, be a citizen for nine years, and live in the state they represent.

Article I, Section 8 enumerates the powers delegated to the legislature. Financially, Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for the common defense and the general welfare; to regulate commerce, bankruptcies, and coin money.

To regulate internal affairs, it has the power to regulate and govern military forces and militias, suppress insurrections and repel invasions. It is to provide for naturalization, standards of weights and measures, post offices and roads, and patents; to directly govern the federal district and cessions of land by the states for forts and arsenals.

Internationally, Congress has the power to define and punish piracies and offenses against the Law of Nations, to declare war and make rules of war. The final Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Elastic Clause, expressly confers incidental powers upon Congress without the Articles' requirement for express delegation for each and every power. Article I, Section 9 lists eight specific limits on congressional power.

​The Supreme Court has sometimes broadly interpreted the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause in Article One to allow Congress to enact legislation that is neither expressly allowed by the enumerated powers nor expressly denied in the limitations on Congress.

In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the Supreme Court read the Necessary and Proper Clause to permit the federal government to take action that would "enable [it] to perform the high duties assigned to it [by the Constitution] in the manner most beneficial to the people," even if that action is not itself within the enumerated powers. 

Chief Justice Marshall clarified: "Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are Constitutional."

Article II – The Executive
Main article: Article Two of the United States Constitution

Article II describes the office, qualifications, and duties of the President of the United States and the Vice President. The President is head of the executive branch of the federal government, as well as the nation's head of state and head of government.

Article two is modified by the 12th Amendment, which tacitly acknowledges political parties, and the 25th Amendment relating to office succession. The president is to receive only one compensation from the federal government. The inaugural oath is specified to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

The president is the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces, as well as of state militias when they are mobilized. The president makes treaties with the advice and consent of a two-thirds quorum of the Senate.

To administer the federal government, the president commissions all the offices of the federal government as Congress directs; and may require the opinions of its principal officers and make "recess appointments" for vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate.

The president ensures the laws are faithfully executed and may grant reprieves and pardons with the exception of Congressional impeachment. The president reports to Congress on the State of the Union, and by the Recommendation Clause, recommends "necessary and expedient" national measures. The president may convene and adjourn Congress under special circumstances.

Section 4 provides for the removal of the president and other federal officers. The president is removed on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Article III – The Judiciary
Main article: Article Three of the United States Constitution

Article III describes the court system (the judicial branch), including the Supreme Court. The article describes the kinds of cases the court takes as original jurisdiction. Congress can create lower courts and an appeals process and enacts law defining crimes and punishments. Article Three also protects the right to trial by jury in all criminal cases, and defines the crime of treason.

Section 1 vests the judicial power of the United States in federal courts and, with it, the authority to interpret and apply the law to a particular case. Also included is the power to punish, sentence, and direct future action to resolve conflicts.

The Constitution outlines the U.S. judicial system. In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress began to fill in details. Currently, Title 28 of the U.S. Code describes judicial powers and administration.

As of the First Congress, the Supreme Court justices rode circuit to sit as panels to hear appeals from the district courts. In 1891, Congress enacted a new system. District courts would have original jurisdiction. Intermediate appellate courts (circuit courts) with exclusive jurisdiction heard regional appeals before consideration by the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court holds discretionary jurisdiction, meaning that it does not have to hear every case that is brought to it.

To enforce judicial decisions, the Constitution grants federal courts both criminal contempt and civil contempt powers. Other implied powers include injunctive relief and the habeas corpus remedy. The Court may imprison for contumacy, bad-faith litigation, and failure to obey a writ of mandamus.

Judicial power includes that granted by Acts of Congress for rules of law and punishment. Judicial power also extends to areas not covered by statute. Generally, federal courts cannot interrupt state court proceedings.

Clause 1 of Section 2 authorizes the federal courts to hear actual cases and controversies only. Their judicial power does not extend to cases that are hypothetical, or which are proscribed due to standing, mootness, or ripeness issues. Generally, a case or controversy requires the presence of adverse parties who have some interest genuinely at stake in the case.

Clause 2 of Section 2 provides that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in cases involving ambassadors, ministers, and consuls, for all cases respecting foreign nation-states, and also in those controversies which are subject to federal judicial power because at least one state is a party. Cases arising under the laws of the United States and its treaties come under the jurisdiction of federal courts.

Cases under international maritime law and conflicting land grants of different states come under federal courts. Cases between U.S. citizens in different states, and cases between U.S. citizens and foreign states and their citizens, come under federal jurisdiction. The trials will be in the state where the crime was committed.

No part of the Constitution expressly authorizes judicial review, but the Framers did contemplate the idea, and precedent has since established that the courts could exercise judicial review over the actions of Congress or the executive branch.

Two conflicting federal laws are under "pendent" jurisdiction if one presents a strict constitutional issue. Federal court jurisdiction is rare when a state legislature enacts something as under federal jurisdiction. To establish a federal system of national law, considerable effort goes into developing a spirit of comity between federal government and states.

By the doctrine of 'Res judicata', federal courts give "full faith and credit" to State Courts. The Supreme Court will decide Constitutional issues of state law only on a case-by-case basis, and only by strict Constitutional necessity, independent of state legislators' motives, their policy outcomes or its national wisdom.

Section 3 bars Congress from changing or modifying Federal law on treason by simple majority statute. This section also defines treason as an overt act of making war or materially helping those at war with the United States. Accusations must be corroborated by at least two witnesses. Congress is a political body, and political disagreements routinely encountered should never be considered as treason. This allows for nonviolent resistance to the government because opposition is not a life or death proposition.

However, Congress does provide for other lesser subversive crimes, such as conspiracy.

Article IV – The States
Main article: Article Four of the United States Constitution

Article IV outlines the relations among the states and between each state and the federal government. In addition, it provides for such matters as admitting new states and border changes between the states. For instance, it requires states to give "full faith and credit" to the public acts, records, and court proceedings of the other states.

Congress is permitted to regulate the manner in which proof of such acts may be admitted. The "privileges and immunities" clause prohibits state governments from discriminating against citizens of other states in favor of resident citizens. For instance, in criminal sentencing, a state may not increase a penalty on the grounds that the convicted person is a non-resident.

It also establishes extradition between the states, as well as laying down a legal basis for freedom of movement and travel among the states. Today, this provision is sometimes taken for granted, but in the days of the Articles of Confederation, crossing state lines was often arduous and costly.

The Territorial Clause gives Congress the power to make rules for disposing of federal property and governing non-state territories of the United States. Finally, the fourth section of Article Four requires the United States to guarantee to each state a republican form of government and to protect them from invasion and violence.

Article V – Amendment Process
Main article: Article Five of the United States Constitution

Article V outlines the process for amending the Constitution. Eight state constitutions in effect in 1787 included an amendment mechanism. Amendment-making power rested with the legislature in three of the states, and in the other five it was given to specially elected conventions.

The Articles of Confederation provided that amendments were to be proposed by Congress and ratified by the unanimous vote of all 13 state legislatures. This proved to be a major flaw in the Articles, as it created an insurmountable obstacle to constitutional reform.

The amendment process crafted during the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention was, according to The Federalist No. 43, designed to establish a balance between pliancy and rigidity.

It guards equally against that extreme facility which would render the Constitution too mutable; and that extreme difficulty which might perpetuate its discovered faults. It moreover equally enables the General and the State Governments to originate the amendment of errors, as they may be pointed out by the experience on one side, or on the other.

There are two steps in the amendment process. Proposals to amend the Constitution must be properly adopted and ratified before they change the Constitution.

First, there are two procedures for adopting the language of a proposed amendment, either by (a) Congress, by two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, or (b) national convention (which shall take place whenever two-thirds of the state legislatures collectively call for one).

Second, there are two procedures for ratifying the proposed amendment, which requires three-fourths of the states' (presently 38 of 50) approval: (a) consent of the state legislatures, or (b) consent of state ratifying conventions. The ratification method is chosen by Congress for each amendment. State ratifying conventions were used only once, for the Twenty-first Amendment.

Presently, the Archivist of the United States is charged with responsibility for administering the ratification process under the provisions of 1 U.S. Code § 106b. The Archivist submits the proposed amendment to the states for their consideration by sending a letter of notification to each Governor. Each Governor then formally submits the amendment to their state's legislature.

When a state ratifies a proposed amendment, it sends the Archivist an original or certified copy of the state's action. Ratification documents are examined by the Office of the Federal Register for facial legal sufficiency and an authenticating signature.

Article Five ends by shielding certain clauses in the new frame of government from being amended. Article One, Section 9, Clause 1 prevents Congress from passing any law that would restrict the importation of slaves into the United States prior to 1808, plus the fourth clause from that same section, which reiterates the Constitutional rule that direct taxes must be apportioned according to state populations.

These clauses were explicitly shielded from Constitutional amendment prior to 1808. On January 1, 1808, the first day it was permitted to do so, Congress approved legislation prohibiting the importation of slaves into the country.

On February 3, 1913, with ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment, Congress gained the authority to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on the United States Census. The third textually entrenched provision is Article One, Section 3, Clauses 1, which provides for equal representation of the states in the Senate. The shield protecting this clause from the amendment process ("no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate") is less absolute but it is permanent.

Article VI – Federal Powers
Main article: Article Six of the United States Constitution

Article VI establishes that the Constitution and all federal laws and treaties made in accordance with it have supremacy over state laws, and that "the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the laws or constitutions of any state notwithstanding."

It validates national debt created under the Articles of Confederation and requires that all federal and state legislators, officers, and judges take oaths or affirmations to support the Constitution. This means that the states' constitutions and laws should not conflict with the laws of the federal constitution and that in case of a conflict, state judges are legally bound to honor the federal laws and constitution over those of any state.


Article Six also states "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Article VII – Ratification
Main article: Article Seven of the United States Constitution

Article VII describes the process for establishing the proposed new frame of government. Anticipating that the influence of many state politicians would be Antifederalist, delegates to the Philadelphia Convention provided for ratification of the Constitution by popularly elected ratifying conventions in each state.

The convention method also made it possible that judges, ministers and others ineligible to serve in state legislatures, could be elected to a convention. Suspecting that Rhode Island, at least, might not ratify, delegates decided that the Constitution would go into effect as soon as nine states (two-thirds rounded up) ratified. Each of the remaining four states could then join the newly formed union by ratifying.

Closing endorsement
​
​The signing of the United States Constitution occurred on September 17, 1787, when 39 delegates endorsed the constitution created during the convention. In addition to signatures, this closing endorsement, the Constitution's eschatocol, included a brief declaration that the delegates' work has been successfully completed and that those whose signatures appear on it subscribe to the final document.

Included are a statement pronouncing the document's adoption by the states present, a formulaic dating of its adoption, and the delegates' signatures. Additionally, the convention's secretary, William Jackson, added a note to verify four amendments made by hand to the final document, and signed the note to authenticate its validity.

The language of the concluding endorsement, conceived by Gouverneur Morris and presented to the convention by Benjamin Franklin, was made intentionally ambiguous in hopes of winning over the votes of dissenting delegates.

Advocates for the new frame of government, realizing the impending difficulty of obtaining the consent of the states needed to make it operational, were anxious to obtain the unanimous support of the delegations from each state. It was feared that many of the delegates would refuse to give their individual assent to the Constitution.

Therefore, in order that the action of the convention would appear to be unanimous, the formula, Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present ... was devised.

The document is dated: "the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord" 1787, and "of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth." This two-fold epoch dating serves to place the Constitution in the context of the religious traditions of Western civilization and, at the same time, links it to the regime principles proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.

This dual reference can also be found in the Articles of Confederation and the Northwest Ordinance.

The closing endorsement serves an authentication function only. It neither assigns powers to the federal government nor does it provide specific limitations on government action. It does, however, provide essential documentation of the Constitution's validity, a statement of "This is what was agreed to." It records who signed the Constitution, and when and where.


Amendments
See also: List of amendments to the United States Constitution

​The procedure for amending the Constitution is outlined in Article V (see above). The process is overseen by the archivist of the United States. Between 1949 and 1985, it was overseen by the administrator of General Services, and before that by the secretary of state.

Under Article Five, a proposal for an amendment must be adopted either by two-thirds of both houses of Congress or by a national convention that had been requested by two-thirds of the state legislatures. Once the proposal has passed by either method, Congress must decide whether the proposed amendment is to be ratified by state legislatures or by state ratifying conventions.

The proposed amendment along with the method of ratification is sent to the Office of the Federal Register, which copies it in slip law format and submits it to the states. To date, the convention method of proposal has never been tried and the convention method of ratification has only been used once, for the Twenty-first Amendment.

A proposed amendment becomes an operative part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (currently 38 of the 50 states). There is no further step. The text requires no additional action by Congress or anyone else after ratification by the required number of states. 

Thus, when the Office of the Federal Register verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents, it drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the nation's frame of government.

This certification is published in the Federal Register and United States Statutes at Large and serves as official notice to Congress and to the nation that the ratification process has been successfully completed.

​The Constitution has twenty-seven amendments. Structurally, the Constitution's original text and all prior amendments remain untouched. The precedent for this practice was set in 1789, when Congress considered and proposed the first several Constitutional amendments. Among these:
Excluding the Twenty-seventh Amendment, which was pending before the states for 202 years, 225 days, the longest pending amendment that was successfully ratified was the Twenty-second Amendment, which took 3 years, 343 days.

The Twenty-sixth Amendment was ratified in the shortest time, 100 days.

The average ratification time for the first twenty-six amendments was 1 year, 252 days; for all twenty-seven, 9 years, 48 days.

The first ten Amendments introduced were referred to as the Bill of Rights which consists of 10 amendments that were added to the Constitution in 1791, as supporters of the Constitution had promised critics during the debates of 1788.

Safeguards of liberty (Amendments 1, 2, and 3)

The First Amendment (1791) prohibits Congress from obstructing the exercise of certain individual freedoms: 
Its Free Exercise Clause guarantees a person's right to hold whatever religious beliefs they want, and to freely exercise that belief, and its Establishment Clause prevents the federal government from creating an official national church or favoring one set of religious beliefs over another.

The amendment guarantees an individual's right to express and to be exposed to a wide range of opinions and views. It was intended to ensure a free exchange of ideas, even unpopular ones. It also guarantees an individual's right to physically gather or associate with others in groups for economic, political or religious purposes. Additionally, it guarantees an individual's right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The Second Amendment (1791) protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court has ruled that this right applies to individuals, not merely to collective militias.

It has also held that the government may regulate or place some limits on the manufacture, ownership and sale of firearms or other weapons. Requested by several states during the Constitutional ratification debates, the amendment reflected the lingering resentment over the widespread efforts of the British to confiscate the colonists' firearms at the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. Patrick Henry had rhetorically asked, shall we be stronger, "when we are totally disarmed, and when a British Guard shall be stationed in every house?"

The Third Amendment (1791) prohibits the federal government from forcing individuals to provide lodging to soldiers in their homes during peacetime without their consent. Requested by several states during the Constitutional ratification debates, the amendment reflected the lingering resentment over the Quartering Acts passed by the British Parliament during the Revolutionary War, which had allowed British soldiers to take over private homes for their own use.

Safeguards of justice (Amendments 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8):

The Fourth Amendment (1791) protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures of either self or property by government officials. A search can mean everything from a frisking by a police officer or to a demand for a blood test to a search of an individual's home or car. A seizure occurs when the government takes control of an individual or something in the possession of the individual.

Items that are seized often are used as evidence when the individual is charged with a crime. It also imposes certain limitations on police investigating a crime and prevents the use of illegally obtained evidence at trial.

The Fifth Amendment (1791) establishes:
  • the requirement that a trial for a major crime may commence only after an indictment has been handed down by a grand jury;
  • protects individuals from double jeopardy, being tried and put in danger of being punished more than once for the same criminal act;
  • prohibits punishment without due process of law, thus protecting individuals from being imprisoned without fair procedures;
  • and provides that an accused person may not be compelled to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might incriminate or be used against him or her in a court of law.

Additionally, the Fifth Amendment also prohibits government from taking private property for public use without "just compensation", the basis of eminent domain in the United States.

The Sixth Amendment (1791) provides several protections and rights to an individual accused of a crime. The accused has the right to a fair and speedy trial by a local and impartial jury. Likewise, a person has the right to a public trial. This right protects defendants from secret proceedings that might encourage abuse of the justice system, and serves to keep the public informed.

This amendment also guarantees a right to legal counsel if accused of a crime, guarantees that the accused may require witnesses to attend the trial and testify in the presence of the accused, and guarantees the accused a right to know the charges against them. In 1966, the Supreme Court ruled that, with the Fifth Amendment, this amendment requires what has become known as the Miranda warning.

The Seventh Amendment (1791) extends the right to a jury trial to federal civil cases, and inhibits courts from overturning a jury's findings of fact. Although the Seventh Amendment itself says that it is limited to "suits at common law", meaning cases that triggered the right to a jury under English law, the amendment has been found to apply in lawsuits that are similar to the old common law cases.

For example, the right to a jury trial applies to cases brought under federal statutes that prohibit race or gender discrimination in housing or employment. Importantly, this amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial only in federal court, not in state court.

The Eighth Amendment (1791) protects people from having bail or fines set at an amount so high that it would be impossible for all but the richest defendants to pay, and also protects people from being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

Although this phrase originally was intended to outlaw certain gruesome methods of punishment, it has been broadened over the years to protect against punishments that are grossly disproportionate to or too harsh for the particular crime. This provision has also been used to challenge prison conditions such as extremely unsanitary cells, overcrowding, insufficient medical care and deliberate failure by officials to protect inmates from one another.

Unenumerated rights and reserved powers (Amendments 9 and 10):

The Ninth Amendment (1791) declares that individuals have other fundamental rights, in addition to those stated in the Constitution. During the Constitutional ratification debates, Anti-Federalists argued that a Bill of Rights should be added. The Federalists opposed it on grounds that a list would necessarily be incomplete but would be taken as explicit and exhaustive, thus enlarging the power of the federal government by implication.

The Anti-Federalists persisted, and several state ratification conventions refused to ratify the Constitution without a more specific list of protections, so the First Congress added what became the Ninth Amendment as a compromise. Because the rights protected by the Ninth Amendment are not specified, they are referred to as "unenumerated".

The Supreme Court has found that unenumerated rights include such important rights as the right to travel, the right to vote, the right to privacy, and the right to make important decisions about one's health care or body.

The Tenth Amendment (1791) was included in the Bill of Rights to further define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. The amendment states that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution.

These powers include the power to declare war, to collect taxes, to regulate interstate business activities and others that are listed in the articles or in subsequent constitutional amendments. Any power not listed is, says the Tenth Amendment, left to the states or the people. While there is no specific list of what these "reserved powers" may be, the Supreme Court has ruled that laws affecting family relations, commerce within a state's own borders, abortion, and local law enforcement activities, are among those specifically reserved to the states or the people.

Governmental authority (Amendments 11, 16, 18, and 21): 

The Eleventh Amendment (1795) specifically prohibits federal courts from hearing cases in which a state is sued by an individual from another state or another country, thus extending to the states sovereign immunity protection from certain types of legal liability. 

Article Three, Section 2, Clause 1 has been affected by this amendment, which also overturned the Supreme Court's decision in Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)

The Sixteenth Amendment (1913) removed existing Constitutional constraints that limited the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes on income. Specifically, the apportionment constraints delineated in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 have been removed by this amendment, which also overturned an 1895 Supreme Court decision, in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., that declared an unapportioned federal income tax on rents, dividends, and interest unconstitutional.

The Sixteenth amendment has become the basis for all subsequent federal income tax legislation and has greatly expanded the scope of federal taxing and spending in the years since.

The Eighteenth Amendment (1919) prohibited the making, transporting, and selling of alcoholic beverages nationwide. It also authorized Congress to enact legislation enforcing this prohibition.

Adopted at the urging of a national temperance movement, proponents believed that the use of alcohol was reckless and destructive and that prohibition would reduce crime and corruption, solve social problems, decrease the need for welfare and prisons, and improve the health of all Americans.

During prohibition, it is estimated that alcohol consumption and alcohol related deaths declined dramatically. But prohibition had other, more negative consequences. The amendment drove the lucrative alcohol business underground, giving rise to a large and pervasive black market. In addition, prohibition encouraged disrespect for the law and strengthened organized crime. Prohibition came to an end in 1933, when this amendment was repealed.

The Twenty-first Amendment (1933) repealed the Eighteenth Amendment and returned the regulation of alcohol to the states. Each state sets its own rules for the sale and importation of alcohol, including the drinking age. Because a federal law provides federal funds to states that prohibit the sale of alcohol to minors under the age of twenty-one, all fifty states have set their drinking age there.

Rules about how alcohol is sold vary greatly from state to state.

Safeguards of civil rights (Amendments 13, 14, 15, 19, 23, 24, and 26):

The Thirteenth Amendment (1865) abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime, and authorized Congress to enforce abolition. Though millions of slaves had been declared free by the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation, their post Civil War status was unclear, as was the status of other millions. 

Congress intended the Thirteenth Amendment to be a proclamation of freedom for all slaves throughout the nation and to take the question of emancipation away from politics. This amendment rendered inoperative or moot several of the original parts of the constitution.

The Fourteenth Amendment (1868) granted United States citizenship to former slaves and to all persons "subject to U.S. jurisdiction." It also contained three new limits on state power: a state:
  1. shall not violate a citizen's privileges or immunities;
  2. shall not deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law;
  3. and must guarantee all persons equal protection of the laws.

These limitations dramatically expanded the protections of the Constitution. This amendment, according to the Supreme Court's Doctrine of Incorporation, makes most provisions of the Bill of Rights applicable to state and local governments as well. It superseded the mode of apportionment of representatives delineated in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, and also overturned the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857).

The Fifteenth Amendment (1870) prohibits the use of race, color, or previous condition of servitude in determining which citizens may vote. The last of three post Civil War Reconstruction Amendments, it sought to abolish one of the key vestiges of slavery and to advance the civil rights and liberties of former slaves.

The Nineteenth Amendment (1920) prohibits the government from denying women the right to vote on the same terms as men. Prior to the amendment's adoption, only a few states permitted women to vote and to hold office.

The Twenty-third Amendment (1961) extends the right to vote in presidential elections to citizens residing in the District of Columbia by granting the District electors in the Electoral College, as if it were a state. When first established as the nation's capital in 1800, the District of Columbia's five thousand residents had neither a local government, nor the right to vote in federal elections. By 1960 the population of the District had grown to over 760,000.

The Twenty-fourth Amendment (1964) prohibits a poll tax for voting. Although passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments helped remove many of the discriminatory laws left over from slavery, they did not eliminate all forms of discrimination.

Along with literacy tests and durational residency requirements, poll taxes were used to keep low-income (primarily African American) citizens from participating in elections. The Supreme Court has since struck down these discriminatory measures.

The Twenty-sixth Amendment (1971) prohibits the government from denying the right of United States citizens, eighteen years of age or older, to vote on account of age. The drive to lower the voting age was driven in large part by the broader student activism movement protesting the Vietnam War. It gained strength following the Supreme Court's decision in Oregon v. Mitchell (1970).

Government processes and procedures (Amendments 12, 17, 20, 22, 25, and 27):

The Twelfth Amendment (1804) modifies the way the Electoral College chooses the president and vice president. It stipulates that each elector must cast a distinct vote for president and vice president, instead of two votes for president. It also suggests that the president and vice president should not be from the same state. Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 is superseded by this amendment, which also extends the eligibility requirements to become president to the vice president.

The Seventeenth Amendment (1913) modifies the way senators are elected. It stipulates that senators are to be elected by direct popular vote. The amendment supersedes Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 1 and 2, under which the two senators from each state were elected by the state legislature. It also allows state legislatures to permit their governors to make temporary appointments until a special election can be held.

The Twentieth Amendment (1933) changes the date on which a new president, Vice President and Congress take office, thus shortening the time between Election Day and the beginning of Presidential, Vice Presidential and Congressional terms. 

Originally, the Constitution provided that the annual meeting was to be on the first Monday in December unless otherwise provided by law. This meant that, when a new Congress was elected in November, it did not come into office until the following March, with a "lame duck" Congress convening in the interim.

By moving the beginning of the president's new term from March 4 to January 20 (and in the case of Congress, to January 3), proponents hoped to put an end to lame duck sessions, while allowing for a speedier transition for the new administration and legislators.

The Twenty-second Amendment (1951) limits an elected president to two terms in office, a total of eight years. However, under some circumstances it is possible for an individual to serve more than eight years. Although nothing in the original frame of government limited how many presidential terms one could serve, the nation's first president, George Washington, declined to run for a third term, suggesting that two terms of four years were enough for any president.

This precedent remained an unwritten rule of the presidency until broken by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was elected to a third term as president 1940 and in 1944 to a fourth.

The Twenty-fifth Amendment (1967) clarifies what happens upon the death, removal, or resignation of the President or Vice President and how the Presidency is temporarily filled if the President becomes disabled and cannot fulfill the responsibilities of the office.

It supersedes the ambiguous succession rule established in Article II, Section 1, Clause 6. A concrete plan of succession has been needed on multiple occasions since 1789. However, for nearly 20% of U.S. history, there has been no vice president in office who can assume the presidency.

The Twenty-seventh Amendment (1992) prevents members of Congress from granting themselves pay raises during the current session. Rather, any raises that are adopted must take effect during the next session of Congress. Its proponents believed that Federal legislators would be more likely to be cautious about increasing congressional pay if they have no personal stake in the vote. 

Article One, section 6, Clause 1 has been affected by this amendment, which remained pending for over two centuries as it contained no time limit for ratification.


Unratified amendments:

Collectively, members of the House and Senate propose around 150 amendments during each two-year term of Congress. Most however, never get out of the Congressional committees in which they are proposed, and only a fraction of those approved in committee receive sufficient support to win Congressional approval and actually enter the constitutional ratification process.

Six amendments approved by Congress and proposed to the states for consideration have not been ratified by the required number of states to become part of the Constitution. Four of these are technically still pending, as Congress did not set a time limit (see also Coleman v. Miller) for their ratification. The other two are no longer pending, as both had a time limit attached and in both cases the time period set for their ratification expired.

Pending:
  • The Congressional Apportionment Amendment (proposed 1789) would, if ratified, establish a formula for determining the appropriate size of the House of Representatives and the appropriate apportionment of representatives among the states following each constitutionally mandated decennial census. At the time it was sent to the states for ratification, an affirmative vote by ten states would have made this amendment operational. In 1791 and 1792, when Vermont and Kentucky joined the Union, the number climbed to twelve. Thus, the amendment remained one state shy of the number needed for it to become part of the Constitution. No additional states have ratified this amendment since. To become part of the Constitution today, ratification by an additional twenty-seven would be required. The Apportionment Act of 1792 apportioned the House of Representatives at 33,000 persons per representative in consequence of the 1790 census. Reapportionment has since been effected by statute.
  • The Titles of Nobility Amendment (proposed 1810) would, if ratified, strip United States citizenship from any citizen who accepted a title of nobility from a foreign country. When submitted to the states, ratification by thirteen states was required for it to become part of the Constitution; eleven had done so by early 1812. However, with the addition of Louisiana into the Union that year (April 30, 1812), the ratification threshold rose to fourteen. Thus, when New Hampshire ratified it in December 1812, the amendment again came within two states of being ratified. No additional states have ratified this amendment since. To become part of the Constitution today, ratification by an additional twenty-six would be required.
  • The Corwin Amendment (proposed 1861) would, if ratified, shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress. This proposal was one of several measures considered by Congress in an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to attract the seceding states back into the Union and to entice border slave states to stay. Five states ratified the amendment in the early 1860s, but none have since. To become part of the Constitution today, ratification by an additional 33 states would be required. The subject of this proposal was subsequently addressed by the 1865 Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery.
  • The Child Labor Amendment (proposed 1924) would, if ratified, specifically authorize Congress to limit, regulate and prohibit labor of persons less than eighteen years of age. The amendment was proposed in response to Supreme Court rulings in Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) and Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co. (1922) that found federal laws regulating and taxing goods produced by employees under the ages of 14 and 16 unconstitutional. When submitted to the states, ratification by 36 states was required for it to become part of the Constitution, as there were forty-eight states. Twenty-eight had ratified the amendment by early 1937, but none have done so since. To become part of the Constitution today, ratification by an additional ten would be required. A federal statute approved June 25, 1938, regulated the employment of those under 16 or 18 years of age in interstate commerce. The Supreme Court, by unanimous vote in United States v. Darby Lumber Co. (1941), found this law constitutional, effectively overturning Hammer v. Dagenhart. As a result of this development, the movement pushing for the amendment concluded.

Expired:
  • The Equal Rights Amendment (proposed 1972) would have prohibited deprivation of equality of rights (discrimination) by the federal or state governments on account of sex. A seven-year ratification time limit was initially placed on the amendment, but as the deadline approached, Congress granted a three-year extension. Thirty-five states ratified the proposed amendment prior to the original deadline, three short of the number required for it to be implemented (five of them later voted to rescind their ratification). No further states ratified the amendment within the extended deadline. In 2017, Nevada became the first state to ratify the ERA after the expiration of both deadlines, followed by Illinois in 2018, and Virginia in 2020, purportedly bringing the number of ratifications to 38. However, experts and advocates have acknowledged legal uncertainty about the consequences of these ratifications, due to the expired deadlines and the five states' purported revocations.
  • The District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment (proposed 1978) would have:
    • granted the District of Columbia full representation in the United States Congress as if it were a state,
    • repealed the Twenty-third Amendment,
    • granted the District unconditional Electoral College voting rights,
    • and allowed its participation in the process by which the Constitution is amended.
  • A seven-year ratification time limit was placed on the amendment. Sixteen states ratified the amendment (twenty-two short of the number required for it to be implemented) prior to the deadline, thus it failed to be adopted.


Judicial review
See also: 
​The way the Constitution is understood is influenced by court decisions, especially those of the Supreme Court. These decisions are referred to as precedents. Judicial review is the power of the Court to examine federal legislation, federal executive, and all state branches of government, to decide their constitutionality, and to strike them down if found unconstitutional.

Judicial review includes the power of the Court to explain the meaning of the Constitution as it applies to particular cases. Over the years, Court decisions on issues ranging from governmental regulation of radio and television to the rights of the accused in criminal cases have changed the way many constitutional clauses are interpreted, without amendment to the actual text of the Constitution.

Legislation passed to implement the Constitution, or to adapt those implementations to changing conditions, broadens and, in subtle ways, changes the meanings given to the words of the Constitution. Up to a point, the rules and regulations of the many federal executive agencies have a similar effect. If an action of Congress or the agencies is challenged, however, the court system ultimately decides whether these actions are permissible under the Constitution.

Scope and theory:

Courts established by the Constitution can regulate government under the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. First, they have jurisdiction over actions by an officer of government and state law. Second, federal courts may rule on whether coordinate branches of national government conform to the Constitution.

Until the twentieth century, the Supreme Court of the United States may have been the only high tribunal in the world to use a court for constitutional interpretation of fundamental law, others generally depending on their national legislature.

The basic theory of American Judicial review is summarized by constitutional legal scholars and historians as follows: the written Constitution is fundamental law within the states. It can change only by extraordinary legislative process of national proposal, then state ratification.

The powers of all departments are limited to enumerated grants found in the Constitution. Courts are expected (a) to enforce provisions of the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, and (b) to refuse to enforce anything in conflict with it.

As to judicial review and the Congress, the first proposals by Madison (Virginia) and Wilson (Pennsylvania) called for a supreme court veto over national legislation. In this it resembled the system in New York, where the Constitution of 1777 called for a "Council of Revision" by the governor and justices of the state supreme court.

The council would review and veto any passed legislation; violating the spirit of the Constitution before it went into effect. The nationalist's proposal in convention was defeated three times and replaced by a presidential veto with congressional over-ride. Judicial review relies on the jurisdictional authority in Article III, and the Supremacy Clause.

The justification for judicial review is to be explicitly found in the open ratifications held in the states and reported in their newspapers. John Marshall in Virginia, James Wilson in Pennsylvania and Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut all argued for Supreme Court judicial review of acts of state legislature.

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton advocated the doctrine of a written document held as a superior enactment of the people. "A limited constitution can be preserved in practice no other way" than through courts which can declare void any legislation contrary to the Constitution.

The preservation of the people's authority over legislatures rests "particularly with judges."

The Supreme Court was initially made up of jurists who had been intimately connected with the framing of the Constitution and the establishment of its government as law. John Jay (New York), a co-author of The Federalist Papers, served as chief justice for the first six years.

The second chief justice, John Rutledge (South Carolina), was appointed by Washington in 1795 as a recess appointment, but was not confirmed by the Senate. Resigning later that year, he was succeeded in 1796 by the third chief justice, Oliver Ellsworth (Connecticut). 

Both Rutledge and Ellsworth were delegates to the Constitutional Convention. John Marshall (Virginia), the fourth chief justice, had served in the Virginia Ratification Convention in 1788. His 34 years of service on the Court would see some of the most important rulings to help establish the nation the Constitution had begun. Other early members of the Supreme Court who had been delegates to the Constitutional Convention included James Wilson (Pennsylvania) for ten years, and John Blair Jr. (Virginia) for five years.


Establishment:

When John Marshall followed Oliver Ellsworth as chief justice of the Supreme Court in 1801, the federal judiciary had been established by the Judiciary Act, but there were few cases, and less prestige. "The fate of judicial review was in the hands of the Supreme Court itself."

Review of state legislation and appeals from state supreme courts was understood. But the Court's life, jurisdiction over state legislation was limited. The Marshall Court's landmark Barron v. Baltimore held that the Bill of Rights restricted only the federal government, and not the states.

In the landmark Marbury v. Madison case, the Supreme Court asserted its authority of judicial review over Acts of Congress. Its findings were that Marbury and the others had a right to their commissions as judges in the District of Columbia. Marshall, writing the opinion for the majority, announced his discovered conflict between Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and Article III.

In this case, both the Constitution and the statutory law applied to the particulars at the same time. "The very essence of judicial duty" according to Marshall was to determine which of the two conflicting rules should govern. The Constitution enumerates powers of the judiciary to extend to cases arising "under the Constitution".

Further, justices take a Constitutional oath to uphold it as "Supreme law of the land." Therefore, since the United States government as created by the Constitution is a limited government, the federal courts were required to choose the Constitution over congressional law if there were deemed to be a conflict.

"This argument has been ratified by time and by practice ..." The Supreme Court did not declare another act of Congress unconstitutional until the controversial Dred Scott decision in 1857, held after the voided Missouri Compromise statute had already been repealed. In the eighty years following the Civil War to World War II, the Court voided congressional statutes in 77 cases, on average almost one a year.

A crisis arose when, in 1935 and 1936, the Supreme Court handed down twelve decisions voiding acts of Congress relating to the New Deal. President Franklin D. Roosevelt then responded with his abortive "court packing plan". Other proposals have suggested a Court super-majority to overturn Congressional legislation, or a constitutional amendment to require that the justices retire at a specified age by law. To date, the Supreme Court's power of judicial review has persisted.

Self-restraint:

The power of judicial review could not have been preserved long in a democracy unless it had been "wielded with a reasonable measure of judicial restraint, and with some attention, as Mr. Dooley said, to the election returns."

Indeed, the Supreme Court has developed a system of doctrine and practice that self-limit its power of judicial review.

The Court controls almost all of its business by choosing what cases to consider, writs of certiorari. In this way, it can avoid opinions on embarrassing or difficult cases. The Supreme Court limits itself by defining what is a "justiciable question":
  • First, the Court is fairly consistent in refusing to make any "advisory opinions" in advance of actual cases. 
  • Second, "friendly suits" between those of the same legal interest are not considered.
  • Third, the Court requires a "personal interest", not one generally held, and a legally protected right must be immediately threatened by government action. Cases are not taken up if the litigant has no standing to sue. Simply having the money to sue and being injured by government action are not enough.

These three procedural ways of dismissing cases have led critics to charge that the Supreme Court delays decisions by unduly insisting on technicalities in their "standards of litigability". They say cases are left unconsidered which are in the public interest, with genuine controversy, and resulting from good faith action. "The Supreme Court is not only a court of law but a court of justice."

Separation of powers:
Further information: Separation of powers under the United States Constitution

The Supreme Court balances several pressures to maintain its roles in national government. It seeks to be a co-equal branch of government, but its decrees must be enforceable. The Court seeks to minimize situations where it asserts itself superior to either president or Congress, but federal officers must be held accountable.

The Supreme Court assumes power to declare acts of Congress as unconstitutional but it self-limits its passing on constitutional questions. But the Court's guidance on basic problems of life and governance in a democracy is most effective when American political life reinforces its rulings.

Justice Brandeis summarized four general guidelines that the Supreme Court uses to avoid constitutional decisions relating to Congress: 
  1. The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional law nor decide open questions unless a case decision requires it. If it does, a rule of constitutional law is formulated only as the precise facts in the case require.
  2. The Court will choose statutes or general law for the basis of its decision if it can without constitutional grounds. If it does, the Court will choose a constitutional construction of an act of Congress, even if its constitutionality is seriously in doubt.
  3. Likewise with the executive department, Edwin Corwin observed that the Court does sometimes rebuff presidential pretensions, but it more often tries to rationalize them.
  4. Against Congress, an act is merely "disallowed". In the executive case, exercising judicial review produces "some change in the external world" beyond the ordinary judicial sphere.

The "political question" doctrine especially applies to questions which present a difficult enforcement issue. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes addressed the Court's limitation when political process allowed future policy change, but a judicial ruling would "attribute finality". Political questions lack "satisfactory criteria for a judicial determination."[200]

John Marshall recognized that the president holds "important political powers" which as executive privilege allows great discretion. This doctrine was applied in Court rulings on President Grant's duty to enforce the law during Reconstruction. It extends to the sphere of foreign affairs. Justice Robert Jackson explained, foreign affairs are inherently political, "wholly confided by our Constitution to the political departments of the government ... [and] not subject to judicial intrusion or inquiry."

Critics of the Court object in two principal ways to self-restraint in judicial review, deferring as it does as a matter of doctrine to acts of Congress and presidential actions.
  1. Its inaction is said to allow "a flood of legislative appropriations" which permanently create an imbalance between the states and federal government.
  2. Supreme Court deference to Congress and the executive compromises American protection of civil rights, political minority groups and aliens.

Subsequent Courts:
Main article: History of the Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Courts under the leadership of subsequent chief justices have also used judicial review to interpret the Constitution among individuals, states and federal branches. Notable contributions were made by:

The Chase Court,
Further information: List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Chase Court

​Salmon P. Chase was a Lincoln appointee, serving as chief justice from 1864 to 1873. His career encompassed service as a U.S. senator and Governor of Ohio. He coined the slogan, "Free soil, free Labor, free men." One of Lincoln's "team of rivals", he was appointed Secretary of Treasury during the Civil War, issuing "greenbacks". Partly to appease the Radical Republicans, Lincoln appointed him chief justice upon the death of Roger B. Taney.

In one of his first official acts, Chase admitted John Rock, the first African American to practice before the Supreme Court. The Chase Court is famous for: 
  • Texas v. White, which asserted a permanent Union of indestructible states. 
  • Veazie Bank v. Fenno upheld the Civil War tax on state banknotes. 
  • Hepburn v. Griswold found parts of the Legal Tender Acts unconstitutional, though it was reversed under a late Supreme Court majority.

The Taft Court,
Further information: List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Taft Court
​​
​William Howard Taft was a Harding appointment to chief justice from 1921 to 1930. A Progressive Republican from Ohio, he was a one-term President.

As chief justice, he advocated the Judiciary Act of 1925 that brought the Federal District Courts under the administrative jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Taft successfully sought the expansion of Court jurisdiction over non-states such as District of Columbia and Territories of Alaska and Hawaii.

In 1925, the Taft Court issued a ruling overturning a Marshall Court ruling on the Bill of Rights. In Gitlow v. New York, the Court established the doctrine of "incorporation", which applied the Bill of Rights to the states.

Important cases included:
The Warren Court,
Further information: List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Warren Court

Earl Warren was an Eisenhower nominee, chief justice from 1953 to 1969. Warren's Republican career in the law reached from county prosecutor, California state attorney general, and three consecutive terms as governor. His programs stressed progressive efficiency, expanding state education, re-integrating returning veterans, infrastructure, and highway construction.

In 1954, the Warren Court overturned a landmark Fuller Court ruling on the Fourteenth Amendment interpreting racial segregation as permissible in government and commerce providing "separate but equal" services.
And the Rehnquist Court.
Further information: List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Rehnquist Court

William Rehnquist was a Reagan-appointed chief justice, serving from 1986 to 2005. While he would concur with overthrowing a state supreme court's decision, as in Bush v. Gore, he built a coalition of Justices after 1994 that developed the idea of federalism as provided for in the Tenth Amendment.

In the hands of the Supreme Court, the Constitution and its amendments were to restrain Congress, as in City of Boerne v. Flores.

Nevertheless, the Rehnquist Court was noted in the contemporary "culture wars" for overturning state laws relating to privacy, prohibiting late-term abortions in Stenberg v. Carhart, prohibiting sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas, or ruling so as to protect free speech in Texas v. Johnson or affirmative action in Grutter v. Bollinger.


Civic religion:
Main article: American civil religion

There is a viewpoint that some Americans have come to see the documents of the Constitution, along with the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, as being a cornerstone of a type of civil religion. Some commentators depict the multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian United States as held together by political orthodoxy, in contrast with a nation-state of people having more "natural" ties.


Worldwide influence:
Main article: Worldwide influence of the Constitution of the United States

T​he United States Constitution has been a notable model for governance worldwide, especially through the 1970s. Its international influence is found in similarities in phrasing and borrowed passages in other constitutions, as well as in the principles of the rule of law, separation of powers, and recognition of individual rights.

The American experience of fundamental law with amendments and judicial review has motivated constitutionalists at times when they were considering the possibilities for their nation's future. 

It informed Abraham Lincoln during the American Civil War, his contemporary and ally Benito Juárez of Mexico, and the second generation of 19th-century constitutional nationalists, José Rizal of the Philippines[ and Sun Yat-sen of China. 

The framers of the Australian constitution integrated federal ideas from the U.S. and other constitutions.

Since the 1980s, the influence of the United States Constitution has been waning as other countries have created new constitutions or updated older constitutions, a process which Sanford Levinson believes to be more difficult in the United States than in any other country.


Criticisms:
Further information: History of the United States Constitution § Criticism of the Constitution

​The United States Constitution has faced various criticisms since its inception in 1787.
The Constitution did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible.

In the early history of the U.S., most states allowed only white male adult property owners to vote; the notable exception was New Jersey, where women were able to vote on the same basis as men. 

Until the Reconstruction Amendments were adopted between 1865 and 1870, the five years immediately following the American Civil War, the Constitution did not abolish slavery, nor give citizenship and voting rights to former slaves. 

These amendments did not include a specific prohibition on discrimination in voting on the basis of sex; it took another amendment—the Nineteenth, ratified in 1920—for the Constitution to prohibit any United States citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of sex.

According to a 2012 study by David Law and Mila Versteeg published in the New York University Law Review, the U.S. Constitution guarantees relatively few rights compared to the constitutions of other countries and contains fewer than half (26 of 60) of the provisions listed in the average bill of rights. It is also one of the few in the world today that still features the right to keep and bear arms; the other two being the constitutions of Guatemala and Mexico.

Difficult to amend:

Sanford Levinson wrote in 2006 that it has been the most difficult constitution in the world to amend since the fall of Yugoslavia. Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that the US Constitution is the most difficult in the world to amend, and that this helps explain why the US still has so many undemocratic institutions that most or all other democracies have reformed, directly allowing significant democratic backsliding in the United States.

Preamble:

Many have criticized the opening statement "We the People," questioning who they intended by "we" and "the People" when they excluded so many groups of people, such as Native Americans and African slaves, and women could not vote. The apparent intended meaning is that "the People" are only European males of Protestant or Deist backgrounds.


Commemorations:

In 1937, the U.S. Post Office, at the prompting of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, an avid stamp collector himself, released a commemorative postage stamp celebrating the 150th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution.

The engraving on this issue is after an 1856 painting by Junius Brutus Stearns of Washington and shows delegates signing the Constitution at the 1787 Convention. The following year another commemorative stamp was issued celebrating the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Constitution. 

In 1987 the U.S. Government minted a 1987 silver dollar in celebration of the 200th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution.
See also: Related documents: Constitution of the United States of America






​
google080f63eb62078b87.html