Talk:Constitutional law of the United States

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2021 and 17 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Awlkr.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

"These claims are hollow" although a reasonable statement, doesn't sound like a neutral point of view to me

Miken32 20:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed empty headings

Someone added the following headings without adding any content:

==History== ===The Founding=== ===From the Founding to the Civil War=== ===Reconstruction=== ===From Reconstruction to the New Deal=== ===From the New Deal to the Rehnquist Court=== ===From the Rehnquist Court to the Roberts Court===

==Areas of Constitutional Law== ===Federalism=== ===Separation of Powers=== ===Individual Rights=== ==Constitutional Theory and Constitutional Interpretation==

Headings should not be created simply so that others can add to it. Those headings will be created once there is content, and until then, they should not be added. This practice does not comply with other the structure of other articles, and it simply looks bad. I kindly ask that others contribute to this article so that we may fill these headings. Stiles 23:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Headings are useful

I put the headings back in because there needs to be some structure for which others may contribute content for such a complex subject. Please leave them there for at least two weeks because I plan to return to this article for further editing. Thanks. Lottamiata 22:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Requests for expansion

Rather than removing the section headings, I am requesting expansion of those sections with short paragraphs for each section (so that the article does not become too long). It will be difficult to keep this article very short, but I believe that the sections provided are the minimum necessary for a comprehensive treatment of this very complex subject. Section paragraphs can refer readers to other pages (some of which are already created, such as "federal jurisdiction"), for more detailed treatment (and, again, to keep the main article as short as possible). Lottamiata 16:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Way too many empty sections

I added the "Too many categories" tag, this article is badly in need of a great deal of attention. The categories were added about a year and a half ago and they're still all empty! Also I wanted to add that this article is difficult to find from the law portal of wikipedia. 67.180.144.112 (talk) 06:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Constitutional Law

I like the fact that in the first amendenment that we have the right to say whatever we want that's awesome —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.129.166 (talk) 04:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Problems with article (Feb. 2016)

As I indicated with the maintenance tags, I think that this article needs a lot of work. In particular, I am concerned by the overall lack of citations, the amount of original research, the unencyclopedic writing style in several sections, and the article's overall organization. I'd welcome a discussion of these perceived issues, as well as any others that you might spot. Best Regards, Astro4686 (talk) 07:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

This article has some fairly extreme problems. There are formatting issues, a very biased point of view, and lot of original research. It appears that most of the problematic edits have been done at some point in March of 2019, long after the article was flagged. This article should be re-written entirely by somebody with deeper knowledge of the field and then locked for review. Katarack21 (talk) 10:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)