A Tradition at War with Itself: A Reply to Professor Rana's Review of America's Forgotten Constitutions: Defiant Visions of Power and Community

Authors

Robert Tsai, American University Washington College of LawFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2015

Journal

Texas Law Review See Also

Volume

94

Abstract

This essay responds to Professor Aziz Rana's review essay, "The Many American Constitutions," 93 Texas Law Review 1193 (2015).

He contends: (1) my portrayal of American constitutionalism might contain a “hidden” teleological understanding of the development of constitutional law; (2) my notion of "conventional sovereignty" sometimes seems content-free and at other times "interlinked with liberal egalitarianism"; and (3) a focus on failed constitutions "inadvertently tends to compartmentalize the overall tradition."

I answer in the following ways: (1) I reject any sense that constitutional law has moved in an arc of steady progress toward Enlightenment and instead embrace a tradition of warring, eclectic, constitutional ideas; (2) the concept of conventional sovereignty captures the locus of mainstream constitutionalism at any given moment in time and doesn't try to insulate any particular governing ideas from contestation; and (3) the constitutions analyzed are exemplars of these popular concepts--some ignored or rejected by mainstream constitutionalism--but they don't purport to represent the entirety of the tradition.

Recommended Citation

Robert Tsai, A Tradition at War with Itself: A Reply to Professor Rana's Review of America's Forgotten Constitutions: Defiant Visions of Power and Community, 94 Texas Law Review See Also (2015).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/facsch_lawrev/1331