On Why the Constitution Matters

The argument here is quite obvious and the content is already well known by historians, political observers, legal scholars, etc. Basically, Tushnet argues that the U.S. constitution does not gain its significance from its ability to protect rights—in fact, rights are constantly contested by the general population and the rulings on them tend to be arbitrary (see, this week’s bullshit draft decision on Roe v. Wade). Instead, the constitution matters because it defines the way American politics are practiced. This is true of the structure of government, obviously, but structural clauses in the constitution also determines the way that political parties function, the way that campaign finance is secured and advertising campaigns take place, the issues that Americans see as politics, etc.

I wish there was something new here, but it’s more a summary of things already widely known.