Daily Kos84%

Why Republicans hate the Constitution 94%

By Oliver Willis92%

7/4/2026, 11:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Left Leaning Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 54.5% saturation with 409 hits. Analysis detected 2,854 faulty-reasoning hits from 750 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 89.1% and a BS Rank of 94% (1,454 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 93.40% of the article peer group.

Explaining the Right is a weekly series that looks at what the right wing is currently obsessing over, how it influences politics—and why you need to know. 
The right has spent decades associating itself with traditional imagery of the Constitution. 
That means years and years of Revolutionary War cosplay, references to the “original intent” of the Constitution, and right-wing figures claiming to be the last remaining defenders of constitutional order. 
But it’s all a lie. 
A protester holds a sign in support of birthright citizenship at the Supreme Court on May 15, 2025. 
This past week, just a few days before America’s 250th birthday, the right renewed its full-throated assault on a cherished constitutional right: birthright citizenship. 
The attack was set off by an executive order from Trump that, in a narrowly decided 6-3 vote, was shut down by the Supreme Court. 
What most observers thought should be an easy 9-0 ruling, citing the 14th Amendment, came perilously close to being washed away. 
After that bullet was dodged, Trump called on Congress to abolish birthright citizenship, which was originally added to the Constitution to affirm the citizenship of formerly enslaved Black Americans. 
Those are not the actions of a party with deep reverence for the Constitution. 
But they are in line with Republican behavior over the last few decades. 
Under Trump, the GOP has tried to undermine basic freedoms, like First Amendment rights by arresting journalists and suing news outlets for unflattering stories. 
Trump even tried to get the government to purge late night talk show hosts who make fun of him. 
Similarly, the Trump team has discussed suspending habeas corpus, which allows people to challenge their detention by security forces. 
Perhaps most blatantly, the Trump administration violated the Constitution while waging war against Iran, bypassing the War Powers provision that requires congressional oversight of such military activities. 
But like most right-wing offenses, this didn’t just begin with Trump. 
Demonstrators carry a signed banner representing the U.S. 
Constitution as they march near the White House during a May Day protest on May 1. 
The presidency of George W. 
Bush was eight years of anti-Constitution pressure, mostly under the pretense of fighting a “war on terror” following 9/11. 
Bush engaged in warrantless wiretapping of citizens, throwing out provisions and traditions from the Constitution. 
The Bush team also detained terrorist suspects for extended periods without affording them their constitutional rights that are meant to be protected regardless of potential crimes. 
And the United States is still recovering from Bush’s torture regime, a direct violation of the constitutional order of things. 
Both Bush and Trump—working hand in hand with the extremists at the National Rifle Association—have also opposed gun safety legislation, despite the Constitution’s references to a “well-regulated militia” in the Second Amendment. 
When it comes to the right and constitutional law, what matters is not the document they purport to revere, but rather the pursuit of power. 
Republicans have prioritized attaining power for their executive and congressional leadership, in addition to jamming through a right-wing policy agenda and protecting leaders—like Trump—from being prosecuted for criminal acts. 
The birthright citizenship case is a great example of this behavior. 
Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito, who all rose through the ranks of the conservative legal world by stressing their “originalist” credentials, simply ignored the original text of the 14th Amendment. 
The legislation reads, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” 
A cartoon by Clay Bennett showing Trump's slush fund "slushie" spilling all over the "rule of law." 
That isn’t an ambiguous statement or one that requires years of legal scholarship to understand, but they still ruled against the Constitution in an effort to hand a win to Trump in his latest power grab. 
Another example of the right’s contempt for the constitutional order is the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, which Trump inspired to prevent the constitutionally mandated certification of the presidential election vote. 
Why? 
Because he lost. 
Not only did Trump egg them on with the promise that their behavior would be “wild,” but he also rewarded them years later with pardons and even pushed for a slush fund to pay them. 
The right’s actions show that securing, increasing, and attaining their own political power is more important than sticking to principles and tradition. 
The evidence is clear: The right does not care about the Constitution. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 25.9%Oliver Willis: 10.7%Daily Kos: 5.7%Confirmation Bias25.9%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.6%Daily Kos: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Oliver Willis: 3.4%Daily Kos: 3.3%Availability Heuristic6.8%This article: 4.0%Oliver Willis: 0.8%Daily Kos: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic4.0%This article: 6.3%Oliver Willis: 1.9%Daily Kos: 0.9%Hindsight Bias6.3%This article: 6.4%Oliver Willis: 1.0%Daily Kos: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias6.4%This article: 11.3%Oliver Willis: 9.6%Daily Kos: 8.9%Framing Effect11.3%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.6%Daily Kos: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.3%Daily Kos: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%Oliver Willis: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.5%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.3%Daily Kos: 1.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.7%Oliver Willis: 1.8%Daily Kos: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.7%This article: 54.5%Oliver Willis: 19.6%Daily Kos: 15.4%Negativity Bias54.5%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.7%Daily Kos: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 15.9%Oliver Willis: 3.6%Daily Kos: 2.6%Fundamental Attribution Error15.9%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Oliver Willis: 3.3%Daily Kos: 2.1%In-Group Bias4.3%This article: 9.9%Oliver Willis: 3.2%Daily Kos: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias9.9%This article: 2.1%Oliver Willis: 0.4%Daily Kos: 1.8%Halo Effect2.1%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.6%Daily Kos: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Oliver Willis: 2.3%Daily Kos: 1.5%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 1.7%Oliver Willis: 0.5%Daily Kos: 0.4%Primacy Effect1.7%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 17.7%Oliver Willis: 8.4%Daily Kos: 5.8%Ad Hominem17.7%This article: 6.5%Oliver Willis: 3.4%Daily Kos: 1.4%Straw Man6.5%This article: 8.0%Oliver Willis: 1.9%Daily Kos: 3.2%Appeal to Authority8.0%This article: 9.7%Oliver Willis: 3.2%Daily Kos: 2.3%False Dilemma9.7%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 2.5%Daily Kos: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 6.3%Oliver Willis: 0.3%Daily Kos: 0.2%Circular Reasoning6.3%This article: 18.4%Oliver Willis: 17.5%Daily Kos: 9.8%Hasty Generalization18.4%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 1.1%Daily Kos: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.5%Oliver Willis: 10.3%Daily Kos: 7.3%Appeal to Emotion19.5%This article: 10.5%Oliver Willis: 3.3%Daily Kos: 1.9%Begging the Question10.5%This article: 18.3%Oliver Willis: 6.9%Daily Kos: 3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.3%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 1.0%Daily Kos: 0.5%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 1.5%Daily Kos: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.7%Daily Kos: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 2.4%Daily Kos: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.4%Daily Kos: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.3%Oliver Willis: 1.4%Daily Kos: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.3%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 2.5%Oliver Willis: 0.3%Daily Kos: 0.2%Personal Incredulity2.5%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 4.3%Oliver Willis: 1.5%Daily Kos: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy4.3%This article: 2.8%Oliver Willis: 2.7%Daily Kos: 2.8%Unattributed Quote2.8%This article: 4.1%Oliver Willis: 2.2%Daily Kos: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection4.1%This article: 32.4%Oliver Willis: 35.3%Daily Kos: 23.1%Biased Writer Voice32.4%This article: 9.9%Oliver Willis: 1.9%Daily Kos: 2.1%Indoctrination9.9%This article: 46.5%Oliver Willis: 23.5%Daily Kos: 10.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias46.5%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 0.2%Daily Kos: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Oliver Willis: 1.4%Daily Kos: 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

750 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker2.3%attributed speech733writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageClay Bennett • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Clay Bennett

100%flagged-word coverage
17 attributed words100% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Politically Left Leaning B-47.6 ptsWriter: 47.6%Clay Bennett: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-33.2 ptsWriter: 33.2%Clay Bennett: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-10.1 ptsWriter: 10.1%Clay Bennett: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-4.2 ptsWriter: 4.2%Clay Bennett: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-2.9 ptsWriter: 2.9%Clay Bennett: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.