From the Lawton Constitution
At the end of every year, I like to look back over my columns and reflect on the events significant enough to write about. Given the ups and downs of the past 12 months, it almost feels cliché to say that 2025 was a crazy year. Crazy has become the norm. A truly remarkable year-end column would begin by saying that not much happened, but that was certainly not the case. So, let’s take a look back at the year that was 2025.
My favorite column each month is always the first one, where I write about a clause of the U.S. Constitution. I believe this is the most important work I do. Most people are familiar with parts of the Constitution, but few know its lesser-known clauses. This year, we remained focused on the Senate, beginning with Article I, Section III, Clause 1 (the Senate Composition and Vacancy Clauses) and ending with Article I, Section VI, Clause 2 (the Ineligibility and Incompatibility Clauses). Along the way, we examined the Qualifications, Leadership, Impeachment, Elections, Assembly, Authority, Quorum, Rules, Punishment, Expulsion, Journal, Adjournment, Pay, Privileges, Immunities, and Debate clauses. My hope is that readers now know far more about the Senate than they did at the start of the year.
Next to the Constitution, the most frequent subject I wrote about was, unsurprisingly, President Trump. I began the year by noting that it was the first time this century that Democrats did not attempt to block the certification of a Republican president in the Senate, a response to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. This was meant to demonstrate respect for democratic norms. The irony, of course, is that Democrats had previously protested the certifications of both George W. Bush and Trump in 2016.
January also brought Trump’s challenge to birthright citizenship. His legal team argued that the 14th Amendment’s phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes children born to parents in the country illegally. This issue is likely headed to the Supreme Court, and we are far from finished with it.
February was dominated by Trump’s Cabinet selections, many of which were controversial and continued to generate headlines throughout the year. Among the most discussed were Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Services, and Linda McMahon for Education. The most unusual appointment, however, was Elon Musk’s leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency. Both the department’s legality and Musk’s appointment were challenged. DOGE cut programs and thousands of federal jobs in the name of reducing waste.
March brought two issues that remain central heading into the next year. With the war in Ukraine still raging, I wrote about the distinction between noninterventionism and isolationism and how Trump’s foreign policy reflected a shift toward the former. The other major issue was Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1789, which grants the president authority to deport non-citizens. The controversy centered on whether that power could be used during peacetime, prompting an examination of the law’s original intent.
April saw continued legal challenges to Trump’s policies, leading me to write about the scope of judicial review over the presidency. Drawing on Federalist Papers No. 78 and Marbury v. Madison, I argued that judicial review is constitutional, even if its application to the modern presidency remains complex. The remainder of April focused on tariffs. I examined the views of Adam Smith and economist Walter Williams, both critics of tariffs, and addressed a viral meme claiming that major tariff occur every 100 years causing depressions. While I cannot yet say whether Trump’s tariffs will succeed, the meme itself was historically inaccurate. As with most economic policies, time will tell.
The dominant story of the summer was Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which I covered in two columns. One examined new Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program work requirements, while the other analyzed who benefited most from the tax provisions. While many measures helped the middle class, several extensions from Trump’s first term disproportionately benefited the wealthy.
In the fall, I focused on Trump’s use of the National Guard in American cities. While its deployment in Washington, D.C., posed no legal issues, its use elsewhere raised more complicated constitutional questions.
Beyond Trump, several national stories also dominated headlines. The year began with President Biden issuing a record number of pardons, including preemptive pardons for family members. Later, gerrymandering controversies in Texas and California took center stage. Finally, as the year closed, six Democratic leaders released a video urging U.S. troops to disobey unlawful orders. While not illegal, it walked a dangerous line.
Locally, I addressed issues important to Oklahomans. I wrote about turnpike toll increases imposed by unelected officials, raising concerns about taxation without representation. I also examined two ballot initiatives voters will face next year: a proposal to replace party primaries with a blanket primary system similar to those in California and Washington, and a measure to gradually raise the minimum wage. Finally, I argued that while requiring Bibles in every classroom may be excessive, but removing them entirely overlooks their immense influence on Western history, literature, and culture.
Historically, 2025 marked several major anniversaries: the 250th anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord, the creation of the U.S. Army, the 75th anniversary of the Korean War, the 200th anniversary of the Erie Canal, and the 100th anniversary of the Grand Ole Opry.
On a personal note, I wrote about watching my son play his final baseball game and becoming an empty nester as my two youngest children left home. These milestones, shared by many families, are both difficult and meaningful.
Finally, we lost several figures who left a lasting impact. While there were several, I wrote about three. Gene Hackman, who stared in one of my favorite movies Hoosiers, passed away in February, Brian Wilson, America’s greatest songwriter in June, and, most tragically, Charlie Kirk who was assassinated in Utah on Sept. 10 while speaking to college students. His death shocked and further divided the nation. Kirk devoted his life to encouraging dialogue, particularly among young conservatives, and his loss may prove to be a turning point for our country.
So there you have it: a look back at a few stories that defined 2025. Many of them are still unfolding. Trump remains president, partisan divisions persist, and even another government shutdown looms. Yet the end of a year always brings the possibility of renewal. History moves in cycles, and while hatred seems deeply entrenched, I still hold onto hope. To paraphrase Scottish poet Robert Burns, may we “take a cup of kindness yet, for old times past.”
Finally, as the year closes, I want to thank a couple people. First, the Hilliary family and JJ Francais for allowing me to write a column each week. I hope you all enjoy reading them as much as I enjoy writing them. Then there are the two who have to read these each week before the public does to make sure I say everything right. First, my editor and friend, Curtis Awbrey, and most importantly, my wife and my rock, Melissa Finck.
James Finck is a professor of American history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He can be reached at james.finck@swoknews.com.
Historically Speaking 