Attorney Elevator Speech
Counsel, may I have one minute?
Ted Hayes has developed a constitutional proposal arising from Supreme Court Case No. 25-365 entitled REHEAR AND ENFORCE.
Its central thesis is that the constitutional analysis may have begun too late in the Reconstruction sequence. The proposal argues that the proper legal foundation begins with the Emancipation Proclamation, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Freedmen’s Bureau legislation, the Reconstruction Amendments, and the Enforcement Acts—not with the Fourteenth Amendment standing alone.
From that foundation, the proposal recommends two constitutionally distinct, yet mutually reinforcing, presidential actions. First, determine whether legally supportable grounds exist for a petition for rehearing. Second, while that process proceeds, determine what continuing Article II responsibilities the President may have to faithfully execute the surviving Emancipation–Reconstruction laws.
No one is being asked to accept these conclusions without careful scrutiny. Quite the opposite. You are being asked to rigorously examine the historical record, constitutional text, statutes, and relevant precedent, and determine whether this proposal raises substantial constitutional questions worthy of immediate consideration.
If, after your review, you conclude that it has legal merit, I respectfully ask that you use your professional judgment and influence to bring it promptly before the President and his legal advisers while any available opportunity for further judicial review remains.
Would you be willing to give this proposal a fair hearing?