In the video above, Newt gives a brief historical narrative on the development of judicial supremacy. We encourage you to view and then join our contest. We are seeking the best submission by any reader of a 800-1000 word op-ed that explains the best strategy for any of the President, the Speaker of the House, or the Chief Justice to take to reestablish a balance of power among the three branches.

 

The deadline for submissions is tenatively July 31st, with the three winners (an op-ed winner for each of the President, Speaker, and Chief Justice) determined shortly thereafter. Winners will have their op-ed published nationally alongside Newt.

How did this contest come about?

The students in Speaker Gingrich’s class in the University of Georgia Law School are tasked with writing a research memo for either the President’s White House counsel, the Speaker of the House, or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that (i) argues why the U.S. Constitutional system should move from judicial supremacy to a more balanced constitutional system (i.e. the memo must present arguments why judicial supremacy is bad constitutional history and bad public policy), and (ii) proposes concrete strategies and steps on how to achieve a balanced constitutional system that can be adopted by the respective Counsel, Speaker, or Chief Justice to whom the memo is directed over a 4-8 year period.

These research memos are to assume that today in the United States we have judicial supremacy and that we should move to a more balanced constitutional system among three co-equal branches.

While the students have up to 25 pages for their memo, we want to organize a contestany reader for the best submission of a 800-1000 word op-ed using the guidelines above

Questions about this contest? Email Us