Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Public Law and Legal Theory
Countersupermajoritarianism, Frederic Bloom, Nelson Tebbe
Countersupermajoritarianism, Frederic Bloom, Nelson Tebbe
Michigan Law Review
Our Constitution can change. We can amend it, update it, improve it. And so we have—twenty-seven times by one count, many more by another. Everyone recognizes this. But fewer people appreciate that the mechanics of constitutional change can change as well. A method of alteration unaddressed at the founding can grow into established practice. A procedure built into constitutional text can slip into disuse. As much as citizens can change the substance of the Constitution, they can also change the ways they change it. In Originalism and the Good Constitution, John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport make an elegant and provocative …
Unbundling Constitutionality, Richard A. Primus
Unbundling Constitutionality, Richard A. Primus
Articles
Constitutional theory features a persistent controversy over the source or sources of constitutional status, that is, over the criteria that qualify some rules as constitutional rules. This Article contends that no single criterion characterizes all of the rules that American law treats as constitutional, such that it is a mistake to think of constitutionality as a status with necessary conditions. It is better to think of constitutionality on a bundle-of-sticks model: different attributes associated with constitutionality might or might not be present in any constitutional rule. Analysts should often direct their attention more to the separate substantive properties that are …
Thirteen Easy Pieces, Frank I. Michelman
Thirteen Easy Pieces, Frank I. Michelman
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Responding to Imperfection: The Theory and Practice of Constitutional Amendment by Sanford Levinson
Constitutional Interpretation, Terrance Sandalow
Constitutional Interpretation, Terrance Sandalow
Articles
"[We] must never forget," Chief Justice Marshall admonished us in a statement pregnant with more than one meaning, "that it is a constitution we are expounding."' Marshall meant that the Constitution should be read as a document "intended to endure for ages.to come, and, consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs."'2 But he meant also that the construction placed upon the document must have regard for its "great outlines" and "important objects."'3 Limits are implied by the very nature of the task. There is not the same freedom in construing the Constitution as in constructing a …