The Politics of Imperfection: The Amendment of Constitutions

Abstract

The essays in Responding to Imperfection (ed. Sanford Levinson) can be read narrowly, as explorations of a set of relatively technical issues in American constitutional law, or broadly, as investigations into the political theory of constitutionalism. The narrow focus is on article 5, which specifies the ways that the U.S. Constitution may be amended. Are the procedures of article 5 exclusive, or may the Constitution be amended in other, unspecified ways? Are there any limitations on which parts of the Constitution may be amended (whether by article 5 procedures or by others, if any), or are parts of the Constitution off limits to such procedures, and if so, what is the extent of this entrenchment? These questions of the nature and limits of the amending powers, endlessly fascinating to students of American law, are the subject of sharp and lively dispute in this volume, and the varied and thoughtful answers given themselves justify the purchase of the book. But editor Levinson has shaped this volume to address much broader questions. How can we understand constitutional change? Do formal amendments account for much or most constitutional change, or at least for the most politically significant ones? Or, as some authors argue, have most truly significant constitutional changes occurred either outside the document or as a direct effect of external political or social changes? Are there rules or conventions that limit or specify which kinds of constitutional