Putin has officially asked the Russian Constitutional Court to approve changes that would allow him to circumvent existing term limits.
SCOTUS already found an identical Texas law to be placing an "undue burden" on women—and in this case, the burden would fall disproportionately on women who are black.
"The president has taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution," former judge Andrew Napolitano wrote. "Instead, he has trashed it."
It wasn't always called the State of the Union.
"There will never, ever have been an American president with the power that Donald Trump possesses right now in this moment," Steve Schmidt argued.
"They're enemies of the free state," Montana state Rep. Rodney Garcia said. "What do we do with our enemies in war? In Vietnam, (Afghanistan), all those. What did we do?"
"On Election Day, as a citizen I will allow that to enter into my decision who to vote for," the legal scholar told Fox News Sunday.
"I respectfully urge the Senate to be guided by the rules of evidence," former Republican Senator John Warner said.
The ERA would protect all of us—and it has finally been ratified by three-fourths of the states. Clear the roadblocks. It's time to amend the Constitution.
"In neither of these cases is there any mention of breaking a specific criminal statute," Chris Wallace explained.
Russia's entire government—including prime minister Dmitry Medvedev—resigned abruptly on Wednesday, after Putin addressed the nation.
A final verdict in impeachment cannot "extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold" office.
The former army chief and president was sentenced to death Monday in absentia by a 2-1 special court decision.
Virginia State Representative Donald McEachin suggested calling out the National Guard to enforce new gun legislation discussed by Governor Ralph Northam in response to the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in the state.
Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law professor and author, said on MSNBC that if Trump's requests of the Ukrainian government and his refusal to comply with subpoenas are not reason enough for impeachment, "then nothing is."
Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe stated in an op-ed that the impeachment process is a much greater issue that affects every American voter.
As House Democrats continue their impeachment inquiry, here's a look at what the legal experts said Wednesday and before former President Clinton's hearing in 1998.
President Donald Trump is facing impeachment, accused of abusing his office to coerce Ukraine to interference in the 2020 election to his campaign's advantage.
Elie Honig explained on CNN to explain why President Donald Trump does not need to have committed a crime to be impeached.
Even if a subsequent president wanted to pardon Trump—in the interest of, say, domestic tranquility—she could not.
An exclusive excerpt from Supreme Court lawyer Neal Katyal and Sam Koppelman's "Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump."
"Impeachment is always constitutional if it originates in the House and if its basis is arguably for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors," wrote Andrew Napolitano in an op-ed.
The president "recognized that sending American troops to Syria is not in the best national security interest of the United States," Andrew Napolitano said.
"Even the appearance of corruption damages our institutions and our faith in government," Republicans for the Rule of Law legal advisor and spokesman Chris Truax said.
Although the Constitution was signed in September, it would be months before it gained the states necessary for ratification.
Government by centuries-old conventions and uncodified rules makes it possible for the powerful to manipulate the system for their own ends
Judge Anthony Trenga ruled Wednesday that the federal government's Terrorist Screening Database violates due process.
"We don't need four more years of that," Pompeo, who would become Trump's Secretary of State, said at the time.
"Isn't anybody going to tell President Bonehead how Article 2 actually works?," Twitter user @mmpadellan wrote.
While ignoring the feelings of minorities, the court wrongfully assumed the only remedy for an unconstitutional monument is to destroy or move it.