Project 2026: Let shareholders limit corporate speech

The Right of Private College to Admit Diverse Students

Higher education has become a necessity for social and economic mobility in our society. This is particularly important for minority groups seeking to access the mainstream of American society. In 2023, however, the Supreme Court held in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard that student admission policies at public universities that benefit minorities violate the Equal Protection Clause and cannot include affirmative action to increase the diversity of a school’s student body. The same reasoning applies to private schools under the equal protection provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Because admissions at private schools, including the Ivy League, are bound by civil rights law, not the Constitution, Congress could amend these statutes to again allow race to be considered for admissions.

Project 2026: Stopping Dangerous Sales of Firearms

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 47,000 people died of gun-related injuries in the United States in 2023. Despite this litany of violence, gun control in the United States has become far more difficult. In 2008, the Supreme Court drastically reinterpreted the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller. Since then, the Court has enthusiastically expanded this newly discovered doctrine to strike down gun regulations. Congress, however, still has the ability hold gun sellers and manufacturers liable for gun violence.

Project 2026: Let shareholders limit corporate speech

In Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court took individual free speech rights and added an ahistorical addition - giving these rights to corporations. The idea that such a fundamental right should be extended to corporations is nonsensical. Speech is not a property right and there is no reasonable argument that corporate speech is a reflection of the speech of its shareholder. Congress, however, can pass a law prohibiting corporations from funding political speech without the permission of their shareholders.

Project 2026: The Right to Reproductive Decision-Making

In 1965, the Supreme Court held in Griswold v. Connecticut that the Constitution protected the right of families to use contraception. In 1973, the Court in Roe v. Wade extended this right to decisions to terminate a pregnancy. When Roe was overturned fifty years later in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, this not only affected abortion rights but threatened access to contraceptives and fertility treatments. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing in concurrence, explicitly called for the Supreme Court to overturn Griswold and remove the remaining constitutional protections for reproductive decisions. Federal legislation could be passed, however, to protect contraception and restore protections for abortion.

Project 2026: Statehood for the District of Columbia

There is a deep irony that the U.S., long a leader in the promotion of democracy, offers no national representation for residents of its own capital. No other country in the world deprives the citizens of their capital of the right to vote. Denying the vote in Washington, D.C. only exacerbates the long-standing history of disenfranchising of black voters. It's time for this injustice to be rectified.