Reviews Lifestyle The New Sober Boom Getting Hooked on Quitting Education Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous Is College Necessary? Finance Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset Crypto Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

Lifestyle The New Sober Boom Getting Hooked on Quitting

Getting Hooked on Quitting

Education Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous Is College Necessary?

Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous

Is College Necessary?

Finance Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset

Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear

Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset

Crypto Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters

‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

Reviews Lifestyle The New Sober Boom Getting Hooked on Quitting Education Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous Is College Necessary? Finance Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset Crypto Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

Lifestyle The New Sober Boom Getting Hooked on Quitting

Getting Hooked on Quitting

Education Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous Is College Necessary?

Liberal Arts Cuts Are Dangerous

Is College Necessary?

Finance Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset

Dying Parents Costing Millennials Dear

Gen Z Investing In Le Creuset

Crypto Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

Investing SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters ‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

SEC vs Celebrity Crypto Promoters

‘Dark’ Personalities Drawn to BTC

SCOTUS keeps papering over the antiquated Second Amendment

The Court's conservative majority turns to “history and traditions” to ignore the obvious — again

Published July 1, 2026 6:30AM (EDT)

This article originally appeared in slightly different form at Medium. Used by permission.

The six Federalist Society-vetted members of the Supreme Court claim to be close readers of the Constitution, “originalists,” who parse the intentions of the founders and, somehow, even the attitude of the public, whenever a law was created. The latter approach is their fairly new “history and traditions” gambit.

Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brent Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, want to keep the country locked into 1789 or 1868 or whenever the original law was passed — unless, of course, they want to change its meaning and morph the Constitution for their own political purposes. Emily Bazelon wrote an illuminating essay on how the Court’s conservative justices are increasingly utilizing the history-and-traditions standard to serve their own agendas.

In Wolford v. Lopez, a 6-3 ruling issued June 25 against a Hawaii law not allowing individuals to carry guns without permission onto private property open to the public, such as grocery stores, gas stations and........

© Salon