Please join me in wishing happy 85th birthday to Sandy Levinson, my dear friend and fellow BBQ connoisseur, my former professor at Harvard University, and since 2018 my colleague here at the University of Texas at Austin. His distinctive views have enriched our study of constitutions for decades.
***
It is difficult to pick my “favorite” publication of his. Sandy has written literally hundreds of scholarly works, including books, papers, essays, and reviews. (The number is approaching 500!) For years now, I have assigned his provocative book on Our Undemocratic Constitution in my course on the mechanics of constitutional reform. I have also routinely assigned his paper on The Political Implications of Amending Clauses.
***
I have found great inspiration in his essay on Accounting for Constitutional Change (Or, How Many Times Has the United States Constitution Been Amended? (A) <26; (B) 26; (C) >26; (D) All of the Above). Sandy explains in this essay that we cannot answer the question he poses in the title without a theory of amendment. What is an amendment, and how do we know when one has been enacted? For example, how should we treat the Bill of Rights: should it count as one mega-amendment or ten separate amendments? Or the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th Amendment: does that count as two amendments, one, or none? Consider also the 27th Amendment, which was enacted the year after Sandy published his essay – fully 203 years after Congress transmitted it to the states. Is that too long between proposal and ratification for an amendment to be treated as valid? And we certainly cannot forget about judicial interpretations: is there a functional difference between an amendment and an authoritative ruling by a court of last resort? I return often to this essay because it challenges our conventional understandings of how constitutions change, and how they should.
***
If I were pressed to choose a “favorite” publication written by Sandy, it would have to be whatever he publishes next.
Happy birthday to Sandy! Richard Albert
Memory Wall for Ran Hirschl
It has now been just over one month since we lost our dear friend Ran Hirschl on May 19, 2026. Shortly after his passing, we created this Memory Wall for those who wish to share a remembrance of him. We invite you to read the memories posted by people all around the world. We invite you to post your own remembrance, too. It will be meaningful for us all. We have arranged for the Memory Wall to be available indefinitely.
Best Constitutional Law Blogs
Feedspot has published its list of the best blogs in Constitutional Law. Congratulations to the Top Five:
This coming week, Suellen Moura will defend her doctoral dissertation titled Autoridade Parlamentar e Função Orçamentária: Fundamentos Constitucionais e Reconfigurações Institucionais. A doctoral candidate at the Universidade Federal do Paraná in Brazil, Suellen was a visiting doctoral scholar here in the Constitutional Studies Program at the University of Texas at Austin. It was a pleasure to host her. And, now, her defense is just days away, scheduled for Wednesday, June 24, at 3pm Curitiba local time. If you would like to join me online to watch the defense, please email Suellen at mourasuellenp@gmail.com for the weblink. She will be pleased to have you there.
***
Suellen’s dissertation offers an ambitious and original account of parliamentary authority in Brazilian constitutional democracy. She focuses her research on the budgetary function and the legal evolution of parliamentary amendments to the Budget Guidelines Law between 1989 and 2025. She shows how incremental changes in rules, procedures, and practices have altered the constitutional distribution of power between Congress and the Executive. Her central contributions are conceptual and empirical: she defines parliamentary authority through normative, practical, and representative dimensions, then traces how these dimensions have expanded in the budget process. More broadly, her combination of political constitutionalism with historical neo-institutionalism reveal not only what has changed, but also how these institutional changes have become stabilized over time. One of the major findings in her dissertation is that Brazilian presidentialism has experienced a functional parliamentarization without formal regime change.
*** This is a sophisticated, timely, and deeply researched dissertation. It advances constitutional theory, public law, and legislative studies by illuminating the budget as a constitutional arena where state authority is contested, reorganized, and informally amended. Her dissertation is a major scholarly contribution that reflects Suellen's exceptional analytical skill, methodological discipline, and promise as a constitutional scholar of the highest order.
The Global Summit on Constitutionalism
Save the Date
We will soon launch the Call for Papers for the Global Summit on Constitutionalism, featuring a mix of plenary panels and concurrent sessions. We will also award the following prizes:
1. Prize for Constitutional Courage
2. Prize for Defending Human Rights
3. Prize for Lifetime Achievement in Constitutional Studies
4. Prize for Scholarly Excellence in Constitutional Studies
5. Prize for Public Policy Impact in Constitutional Studies
6. Prize for Mentorship in Constitutional Studies
More details to come!
Amending Constitutional Essentials
I wholeheartedly recommend this new essay by Alessandro Ferrara, published just last week in the International Journal of Constitutional Law: Constitutional Identity and Constitutional Authenticity. His essay begins from the proposition that constitutions do more than organize institutions or regulate lawmaking: they preserve a transgenerational political identity capable of integrating a people across time. Ferrara distinguishes three models of constitutional identity – procedural, existential, and political-liberal – and defends the political-liberal model associated with Rawls as the most persuasive way to reconcile constitutional continuity with democratic change. On this view, a constitution is authentic not because it merely reflects the will of a founding generation, nor because it instantiates abstract procedural reason, but because its essentials express a political conception of justice that remains “most reasonable for us.” *** The key innovation in his essay is his account of sequential democratic sovereignty and vertical reciprocity among generations, which serves as a powerful justification why present citizens may legitimately be constrained in amending constitutional essentials. Ferrara's essay clarifies the stakes of constitutional amendment, identity, and legitimacy with rare philosophical depth, conceptual precision, and normative imagination.
***
I regard this essay as an important and generative intervention in contemporary debates on constitutional change, democratic sovereignty, and intergenerational constitutional responsibility in pluralist societies.
Religion and Rights
The newest addition to our Oxford Series in Comparative Constitutionalism is now published: Politicized Religion and the Reframing of Fundamental Rights, co-authored by Susanna Mancini and Michel Rosenfeld. The authors argue that proponents of illiberal nationalism and populism have politicized religion to reframe fundamental rights in exclusionary anti-pluralist ways. They illustrate their argument with reference to several jurisdictions across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas. They also shine a light on the expanding role of transnational non-governmental organizations in the politicization of religion and the reframing of fundamental rights. Congratulations!
Students played the role of delegates in a constituent assembly. They designed, negotiated, and debated proposals to amend the U.S. Constitution, with a demanding threshold of 76 votes required for passage. On Day 3 of the Convention, six amendments cleared that high bar: (1) restricting the removal of executive officers and clarifying vacancy rules (90 votes); (2) protecting digital privacy rights (88 votes); (3) prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation (80 votes); (4) banning partisan gerrymandering (83 votes); (5) prohibiting involuntary servitude as criminal punishment (80 votes); and (6) restricting the taking of private property for private use or development (78 votes). Thirteen other proposals fell short, including amendments to establish congressional term limits, to apportion Electoral College votes proportionally, to create a right to a clean environment, and to replace the presidential pardon power with a Court of Mercy.
***
As my friend Rick LaRue writes in a moving essay for The Fulcrum, the delegates tackled hard questions with civility and genuine deliberation – and in doing so, they “proved that their generation is ready and able to lead us upwards again.” For all who witnessed the Convention, the event was a glorious reminder of what serious democratic engagement looks like.
The new book A Rights-Based Inter-Legal Approach to Artificial Intelligence is a timely and needed intervention in the fast-moving debate over AI governance. Elif Biber shows why existing European regulatory frameworks remain incomplete responses to the risks confronting rights when public authorities deploy AI systems. The central contribution of this new book is its rights-based, inter-legal framework: an approach that treats AI not merely as a technical or risk-management problem, but as a public law challenge that requires attention to fundamental rights across the full lifecycle of AI design, deployment, and review. Its proposed three-step adjudication model offers scholars, policymakers, judges, and practitioners a practical method for translating principle into legal analysis. Congratulations!
*** I had the privilege of meeting Justice Major in 1999. At the time, he was completing his seventh year as a Justice on the Supreme Court of Canada. I was an undergraduate student at Yale University. I wrote him a letter to introduce myself and to express my interest in learning about him and his work. He responded with great warmth. I invited him to come to Yale to give a public lecture on the 1998 Secession Reference. He gave an amazing lecture! He then invited me to his office at the Supreme Court. Since then, we have remained in touch. He has supported me, encouraged me, and helped me in ways both known and unknown to me.
***
Justice Major recently turned 95 years old! He continues to be active in law and exercise, and he remains one of the best storytellers I have ever met. Here we are, below, having lunch at the Ranchmen's Club in Calgary.
Courts in our Populist Moment
In their forthcoming book Courts in the Age of Polarization: Supreme and Constitutional Courts in Politically Divided Societies, long-time co-authors Iddo Porat and Moshe Cohen-Eliya have produced a comparative study tracking how intense partisan division reshapes global judicial landscapes. Their forthcoming book highlights the mechanisms driving courts toward overt partisanship in several jurisdictions, including Brazil, Germany, India, Israel, and the United States. Yet rather than merely diagnosing the erosion of democratic checks and balances, they thoughtfully outline potential structural reforms to depoliticize courts. Theoretically deep and conceptually rich, this book is an excellent resource for understanding the survival and legitimacy of independent courts amid populist waves.
My chapter for their book is titled “Does Unamendability Ever Matter?” (An early draft of the chapter is available here.) I suggest that unamendable constitutional rules matter only rarely – and that one of these rare instances is evident in Germany, namely that unamendable constitutional rules matter where they are backed by an authoritative court of last resort that is both willing and able to enforce them against noncompliant actors. The book has been published by Mohr Siebeck and is now available here.
Women in Law in Africa
The new book African Women in Law: A Comparative Perspective is a landmark contribution to the study of law, gender, institutions, and leadership in Africa. Grounded in extensive empirical research – including interviews, surveys, and secondary literature across multiple countries – the book is the first comprehensive comparative account of African women in the legal profession. Authored by J. Jarpa Dawuni, the book examines women’s experiences at the bar, on the bench, and in legal academia, while tracing the historical, institutional, social, and positional forces that shape their entry, advancement, and leadership. Dawuni’s HISP framework – History, Institutions, Social Norms, and Position(ality) – provides a powerful analytical lens for understanding both exclusion and accommodation within legal institutions. The original concepts in the book (including the “other-bar” and “other-bench”) challenge conventional narratives and reject any single or essentialist account of the lives of African women in law. What results is a complex story of resilience, innovation, constraint, and institutional transformation. This book promises to be a foundational work in comparative law and gender studies. It will inspire new research into African legal institutions, and offer indispensable insights for scholars, judges, lawyers, policymakers, and advocates committed to equality, representation, and justice.
You are also welcome to suggest reviewers, including yourself, provided you are fully at arm's length from the author of the book.
Reasoning in Nordic Courts
Published just last month: Constitutional Reasoning in the Nordic Supreme Courts: An Empirical and Comparative Legal Perspective. Edited by Katalin Kelemen, this volume delivers the first systematic empirical and comparative study of constitutional reasoning across the supreme courts of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden – the five Nordic countries. The contributors analyze the leading judgments of each Nordic supreme court across dozens of variables, including the general characteristics of the cases, types of arguments, and key constitutional concepts. The result is a richly textured portrait that probes whether the celebrated “Nordic model” is one lone tradition or several. Methodologically rigorous yet accessible, this collection fills a long-standing gap, since there has not yet been a deep analysis of the reasoning practice of Nordic supreme courts in constitutional cases from a comparative perspective. This book will be of great interest to comparative constitutionalists, Nordic lawyers, and anyone interested in how apex courts practice constitutional reasoning.
A Scholar and a Gentleman
Last month, I was pleased to meet Abdulaziz Aljohani. An attorney and teacher with specializations in Criminal Law, Criminal Justice, and International Crimina Law, he is currently completing doctoral studies here in the United States while on leave from his faculty position in Saudi Arabia. For him, criminal law is extraordinarily important in a society: “I believe that criminal justice is not merely about punishment, but a system for protecting society, ensuring victims’ rights, safeguarding the rights of the accused, strengthening trust in the law, and preventing impunity.” I enjoyed meeting Abdulaziz. He is a scholar and a gentleman.
*** Here we are, pictured below. I am holding a gift from Abdulaziz of delicious Sukkari dates, one of the most popular types of dates in Saudi Arabia. Dates are one of my favorite foods. I could them at every meal!
Property as a Social Right?
In an era of massive wealth concentration and deepening housing crises, Koldo Casla argues compellingly that property should be understood not as an individual shield against the state, but as a social right that is bounded by obligations to the wider community. His new book The Social Right to Property draws upon international human rights law, comparative constitutional analysis, and property theory to build a five-principle framework to anchor a social right to property. Chapters take readers from Africa to Europe and across the Americas, addressing the financialization of housing, corporate landlords, rent control, and the privatization of public services. The best part of all: the book is freely available here in open access.
3rd Edition of UEES at UT
Earlier this month, we hosted the third edition of our week-long summer seminar on Contemporary Challenges to Constitutional Democracies in collaboration with the Universidad Espíritu Santo, the leading university in Ecuador and one of the best in Latin America. Our group of 25 students was treated to a mix of instruction and excursions. Students visited the LBJ Presidential Library, the Supreme Court of Texas, and the Texas Capitol. And, of course, our guests enjoyed local Texas BBQ!
***
I am grateful to my dear colleagues Pablo Alarcón Peña and Pamela Aguirre Castro for partnering with me to co-host this program. It is always a joy to collaborate with them!
JCL-MENA is a double-blind peer-reviewed bilingual journal managed and edited by the Arab Association of Constitutional Law (AACL).
Constitutional Amendment in Brazil
Can a constitution be amended time and time again, and yet continue to serve as a stable framework for democratic government? This is the question addressed in the new book Amendments, Change and the Stability of Constitutions: The Cathedral Constitution of Brazil, an innovating and illuminating contribution to comparative constitutional change. Focusing on 1988 Constitution of Brazil, Guilherme Baena Fernandes de Godoy, Laila Maia Galvão, and Rafael Silveira e Silva show that constitutional change need not be understood only as decay, rupture, or instability. In Brazil, as they demonstrate, amendment has also functioned as a mechanism of adaptation, preservation, and institutional continuity. The “cathedral constitution” metaphor in their book captures their central insight: constitutional systems may be built, repaired, extended, and reinterpreted over time without losing their identity. This book will be of interest to scholars of constitutional amendment, democratic resilience, and institutional design. It will be especially valuable for those interested in how constitutions endure – not by remaining frozen in time, but by changing in ways that sustain their authority, legitimacy, and democratic promise.
The year 2027 will mark the 240th anniversary of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, held in Philadelphia. It was landmark moment in the history of the United States and the world. What does the Convention mean for constitutional law today? How did the Framers manage to come to agreement in Philadelphia? And is it time to do it again in a Second Constitutional Convention? These are only a few of the many questions raised by this anniversary celebration.
*** I am pleased to be joined on the Board of the Section on Constitutional Law by Stephanie Barclay, Franciska Coleman, David Cruz, Eugene Mazo, Alex Sinha, Lee Strang, Tracy Thomas, and Danielle Wingfield. My thanks to each of them for their work on behalf of the Section.
A Movie Recommendation
I recommend the extraordinary new movie Young Washington. It brings to life the early adulthood of George Washington. It will be in theatres on July 3.
***
I watched the movie earlier this month at an advanced screening hosted by the School of Civic Leadership at the LBJ Presidential Library. The movie teaches us about the pre-revolutionary era in colonial America, it moves us with stirring performances by outstanding actors, and it inspires us with the remarkable story of the coming of age of America's First Founder.
***
Watch the trailer here. Learn more about the movie here.
Supreme Audit Institutions
In Exploring the Uncharted World of Audit Institutions – published in Comparative Administrative Law: New Voices, New Perspectives (2026) – Eugenio García-Huidobro maps a critical blind spot in comparative administrative law: Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs). Once treated as obscure bookkeepers, SAIs have evolved into powerful accountability watchdogs operating in nearly every country. Yet legal scholars have barely studied them comparatively. García-Huidobro shows that the standard typologies fail to capture how broadly SAIs now interpret their mandates. Many have moved beyond financial and compliance audits into policy formulation, ex ante review, sanctions, and even human rights advocacy. Drawing on examples from Brazil, Chile, India, Israel, and beyond, García-Huidobro identifies a serious counter-majoritarian dilemma: unelected auditors increasingly veto or chill decisions made by democratically elected officials. More broadly, his chapter inquires into the hidden architecture of accountability that shapes and sometimes paralyzes modern administrative states.
*** Everyone in attendance was impressed by how well the students performed – and just how much they know about national, state, and local government. We all left inspired by these remarkable young persons.
Here is the main rule in the policy: “The use of AI is prohibited for aid in conceptualizing, outlining, drafting, revising, translating, or editing any work submitted for credit. AI use is prohibited for any use for any purpose in any exam situation. Students may not upload course materials—including assignments, readings, slides, class recordings, or other class content—into generative AI systems. AI can be used for research on papers ONLY for the limited purpose of identifying sources, such as cases, statutes, or secondary sources.” The policy takes effect this summer.
#Mission365
Colleagues around the world have joined me on #Mission365. The newest member of the team is Sofia Ranchordás, Full Professor of Administrative Law at Tilburg University. Thank you! Your participation gives me added motivation.
***
This year I am on a mission to exercise every day of the year. (I missed three days last year.) I have been posting a daily photo of my exercise routine on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X/Twitter, and on my website. Public accountability keeps me striving for my goal.
***
Please let me know if you, too, will take the challenge!
Was this email forwarded to you by someone else?
Click here to sign-up to receive it directly from me.
The mission of the International Forum on the Future of Constitutionalism is to marshal knowledge and experience to build a world of opportunity, liberty, and dignity for all.
727 East Dean Keeton Street Austin, TX 78705, United States
