We the People

As the Center marks the 250th anniversary of the nation, we’re taking a closer look at the people, events, and ideas that set the American Revolution in motion and ultimately led to the creation and adoption of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. This moment invites us to broaden the story of the founding by exploring not only the familiar figures we often study, but also the wider community of thinkers who helped shape the principles of our constitutional democracy. 

In this episode Mary Sarah Bilder of Boston College Law School and Sara Georgini of the Massachusetts Historical Society join the program to discuss two remarkable women central to 18th-century intellectual life whose ideas influenced many of the era’s most notable figures: Catharine Macaulay and Mercy Otis Warren. Julie Silverbrook, Chief Content and Learning Officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates.

Resources 

Mary Sarah Bilder, Madison's Hand: Revising the Constitutional Convention (2017) 

Mary Sarah Bilder, The Transatlantic Constitution: Colonial Legal Culture and the Empire (2008) 

Mary Sarah Bilder, Female Genius: Eliza Harriot and George Washington at the Dawn of the Constitution (2022) 

Mary Sarah Bilder, Hater of Kings: Catharine Macaulay’s Constitutional Regicide and the Declaration of Independence,” Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 654, (July 23, 2025) 

Sara Georgini, Household Gods: The Religious Lives of the Adams Family (2022) 

Sara Georgini (series editor), Adams Papers Digital Edition, Massachusetts Historical Society 

Karen Green (editor), The Correspondence of Catharine Macaulay (2019) 


Mercy Otis Warren Letter to Catharine Macaulay, August 24, 1775, Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠[email protected]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr

Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠


⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate

Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen

Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Support our important work

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

On February 28, President Trump announced “major combat operations in Iran.” The operation, known as Epic Fury, has renewed a long-standing debate about the scope of presidential war powers and who decides when the nation goes to war. Last week, Congress rejected legislation that sought to require President Trump to obtain congressional approval for military actions against Iran. The Constitution divides war powers between Congress, which has the authority to declare war, and the president, who serves as Commander in Chief. 

In this episode, Harold Hongju Koh of Yale Law School and Michael D. Ramsey of San Diego Law School explore the constitutional foundations of war powers, as well as the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and how they inform the constitutional authority debates about the use of military force today. Julie Silverbrook, Chief Content and Learning Officer at the National Constitution Center, moderates. 

 

Resources  


Article I, Section 8, Declare War Clause, NCC’s Interactive Constitution  


Article II, Section 2, Commander in Chief Clause, NCC’s Interactive Constitution  


War Powers Resolution, congress.gov 

Michael D. Ramsey, “The Constitution’s Check on Warmaking,” Law & Liberty, (January 27, 2026) 

Michael D. Ramsey, “Textualism and War Powers,” University of Chicago Law Review 69, no. 4 (2002)  

Harold Hongju Koh, The National Security Constitution: Sharing Power After the Iran-Contra Affair (Second Edition, 2024)  

Harold Hongju Koh, “Humanitarian Intervention: Time for Better Law,” American Journal of International Law Unbound 111 (2017)  

National Constitution Center, “Does the War Powers Resolution debate take on a new context in the Iran conflict?,”Constitution Daily Blog, (March 3, 2026)  

National Constitution Center, “When Congress last used its powers to declare war,” Constitution Daily Blog, (December 8, 2018) 


Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2026) 


Dellums v. Bush (1990) 


Prize Cases (1863) 


Ange v. Bush, (D.D.C. 1990)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠[email protected]⁠⁠⁠⁠

Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr

Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠


⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate

Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen

Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠

Support our important work

⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

In celebration of Women’s History month, we revisit a conversation that explores the life and legacy of women who have inspired Constitutional change throughout American history. Joining the conversation are Tomiko Brown-Nagin, author of Civil Rights Queen: Constance Baker Motley and the Struggle for Equality, and Elizabeth Cobbs, author of Fearless Women: Feminist Patriots from Abigail Adams to Beyoncé. Jeffrey Rosen, CEO Emeritus of the National Constitution Center, moderates. 

This conversation was originally streamed live as part of the NCC’s America’s Town Hall program series on April 25, 2023. 

 

Resources 

Tomiko Brown-Nagin, Civil Rights Queen: Constance Baker Motley and the Struggle for Equality (2023) 

Tomiko Brown-Nagin, “Identity Matters: The Case of Judge Constance Baker Motley,” Columbia Law Review (2017) 

Tomiko Brown-Nagin, Courage to Dissent: Atlanta and the Long History of the Civil Rights Movement (2012) 

Elizabeth Cobbs, Fearless Women: Feminist Patriots from Abagail Adams to Beyoncé (2023) 

Q&A, “Elizabeth Cobbs,” C-SPAN (March 14, 2023) 


Muller v. Oregon (1908) 

National Constitution Center, “The Legality of Abortion Pills,” We the People podcast (April 13, 2023) 

Brandon Burnette, "Comstock Act of 1873 (1873)," First Amendment Encyclopedia 

National Constitution Center, “Women and the American Idea,” America’s Town Hall series (April 25, 2023)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠[email protected]⁠⁠⁠

Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr

Explore the ⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠


⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate

Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen

Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠

Support our important work

⁠⁠⁠Donate

On February 20, the Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as IEEPA, does not authorize President Trump’s sweeping tariffs. In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, and the consolidated case, the Court held that the statute does not grant the President the power to impose tariffs under a declaration of economic emergency. 

In this episode, we explore what the Court held, why the Justices disagreed about the reasoning, and what this decision might tell us about the future of presidential emergency power. To help us explore these questions are two leading Court watchers and constitutional experts, Zachary Shemtob of SCOTUSblog and Ilya Somin of the George Mason University. Julie Silverbrook, vice president of civic education of the National Constitution Center, moderates. 

Resources 


Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (2026) 

“Supreme Court strikes down tariffs,” SCOTUSblog (2/20/2026) 

Ilya Somin, “How the Supreme Court Spared America,” The Atlantic (2/21/2026) 

Ilya Somin, “The Supreme Court Spurns a Presidential Power Grab,” The Dispatch (2/23/2026) 

Ilya Somin, “Trump’s new tariffs are another dangerous presidential power grab,” Boston Globe (2/24/2026) 

Ilya Somin, “Not Everything Is an Emergency,” The Dispatch (1/31/2025) 


“Are Trump’s Tariffs Lawful?,” We the People (11/06/2025) 


Biden v. Nebraska (2023) 


Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc. (2001) 


Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981) 


Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1953) 


United States v. Yoshida International, Inc. (CCPA, 1975) 


United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936) 


Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠[email protected]⁠⁠

Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr

Explore the ⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠


⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate

Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen

Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠live program⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠

Support our important work

⁠⁠Donate

New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie joins award-winning journalist Juan Williams for a conversation on Williams’ latest book, New Prize for These Eyes: The Rise of America’s Second Civil Rights Movement, exploring the emergence of a new civil rights era—from the 2008 election of President Obama to the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Thomas Donnelly, chief scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates. 

This conversation was originally streamed live as part of the NCC’s America’s Town Hall series on February 26, 2025. 

Resources

Juan Williams, New Prize for These Eyes: The Rise of America’s Second Civil Rights Movement (2025)

Jamelle Bouie, “Discussing Trayvon Martin, Obama Embraces his Blackness,” The American Prospect (July 19, 2013)

Jamelle Bouie, opinion columnist, The New York Times

Civil Rights Movement

Reconstruction

Thomas Ricks, Waging a Good War: A Military History of the Civil Rights Movement, 1954-1968 (2022)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at [email protected]⁠

Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr

Explore the ⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠


⁠Sign up⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate

Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen

Join us for an upcoming ⁠live program⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠YouTube⁠

Support our important work

⁠Donate