by on May 12th, 2016

It’s time for another Morningside Heights Declaration.

by on November 16th, 2015

In debates over marriage and abortion, we should make arguments based on constitutional texts and judicial precedent. But would it be legitimate also for judges to consider overarching questions of justice and natural law?

by on November 4th, 2015

History clearly demonstrates that the legislative branch can legitimately act to counter the rulings of the judicial branch. This is as true for marriage as it was for slavery.

by on August 21st, 2014

Legislators and judges not only can but must gauge the moral justification of every law.

by on May 13th, 2013

We don’t need a new resolution from Congress to address the wrongs of clinics like Kermit Gosnell’s—the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act already serves that purpose, and we should restore the civil penalties originally attached to it.

by on July 6th, 2011

A recent Supreme Court case reveals a division amongst conservatives over the moral foundations of the law.

by on February 19th, 2011

All lying is immoral, but not all false utterances are lies.

by on February 4th, 2011

Wrapping up an exchange on judgment and morality.

by on December 20th, 2010

Kant was right: we need principles to guide our judgments.

by on December 2nd, 2010

Responding to a review of his most recent book, Hadley Arkes asks some questions about the nature of natural law.

by on October 13th, 2010

It’s time for conservatives and liberals alike to remember that certain words by their very utterance inflict injury.

by on June 9th, 2009

All education is moral education, because it carries an understanding of the things worth knowing—and a hierarchy of the things more or less worthy of being known. Moral education must also point to a certain end: an understanding of the ways of life that are better or worse for human beings. It must point to a certain kind of political regime in providing the cast of our lives: the laws that protect the integrity of families and the professions, and the terms of principle on which a decent people deserve to live. The following article is adapted from the Commencement Address Arkes delivered at Hillsdale College on May 10, 2009.

by on November 2nd, 2008

Can the Democratic Party's awkward position on infanticide and abortion be regarded as simply a lesser matter in an ensemble of "other issues" of higher standing? Or does that position challenge the very coherence of everything else that a liberal party proclaims itself to be?