Thread by @rddoerfler

The sense of “constitutionalism” that @samuelmoyn and I criticize is one of entrenchment. The idea is that certain choices should be removed from ordinary politics, subject to change at best under conditions of extraordinary consensus. 1/9
nytimes.com/2022/08/19/opi…

As we argue, that sort of entrenchment is undemocratic as well as a failed politics for the left, which should be offering a politics of radical imagination bolstered by arguments about what sort of society would be good or just instead of claims about text or tradition. 2/9

This leaves open that “constitutionalism” of another sort might remain useful. As @samuelmoyn and I have explained elsewhere, there is an older sense according to which a polity’s “constitution” refers merely to its basic rules and commitments. 3/9
publicseminar.org/essays/post-co…

As we explain in that earlier piece, that a society has a defined governmental structure or fundamental values is more or less unavoidable. Our claim is simply that those things should be subject to ongoing political contestation, as opposed to being frozen in amber. 4/9

With this distinction in mind, one might criticize our new piece for disparaging as opposed to *reclaiming* the term “constitutionalism.” Why not advocate a return to the older sense instead of accepting and critiquing the modern one? 5/9

As a longer-term project, that makes sense. It would mark a huge victory if, in the US, the sense of “constitutionalism” as entrenchment were forgotten, and the word “constitution” suggested to people merely basic commitments that we remain free to contest and abandon. 6/9

Unfortunately, that is not yet our country. Instead, our political culture is, instead, characterized by decades of veneration of our written constitution as a near holy text (see Aziz Rana’s forthcoming book for the definitive account). 7/9

For that reason, the word “constitution” in the United States today calls to mind a practically unamendable document that sets the basic structure of our society both in governmental form and fundamental values. 8/9

Popularizing the idea that we can and should do without a “constitution” in that sense is itself a huge political task. And one that we think is a necessary first step to reclaiming the notion of “constitutionalism.” Pretending otherwise is, we think, at best confusing. 9/9