Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Constitutional Democracy in the Age of Populisms: A Commentary to Mark Tushnet’s Populist Constitutional Law

  • Comment
  • Published:
Res Publica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This contribution aims at discussing constitutional democracy in the age of populisms, by explaining how populist movements oppose liberal-democratic constitutionalism and by presenting the thesis of a so-called ‘populist constitutionalism’, as proposed by Mark Tushnet. In the first section, a general and analytic exploration of populist phenomena will be drawn, by focusing on the so-called thesis of a ‘populist’ constitutionalism. In the second part, Tushnet’s arguments for a populist constitutionalism will be presented, through the analysis of his two main contributions: Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts, in which Tushnet develops his critique of legal constitutionalism and judicial review as an undemocratic power by unelected justices, and Authoritarian Constitutionalism, a recent article in which Tushnet distinguishes between ‘authoritarian’ and ‘populist’ definitions of constitutionalism. In conclusion, such arguments will be discussed, by proposing a critical response to Tushnet’s position and presenting some risks of a majoritarian and populist constitutional democracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. On this line, see the various appeals for a nationalistic and ethnic defence of the ‘people’: ‘America first’ or ‘make America great again’ by President Trump and ‘Britain first’ by Farage’s UKIP and Brexit supporters; ‘prima gli italiani’ (Italians first) claimed by the Italian political leader Matteo Salvini; or the most recent Lepenist motto ‘Choisir la France’, which replaced the previous slogan ‘Remettre la France in ordre’.

References

  • Azmanova, Albena. 2018. The populist catharsis: On the revival of the political. Philosophy and Social Criticism 44(4): 399–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilgrami, Akeel. 2018. Reflections on three populisms. Philosophy and Social Criticism 44(4): 453–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blokker, Paul. 2017. Populist constitutionalism. In Routledge handbook of global populism, ed. Carlos de la Torre. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, Rogers. 2017. Why populism? Theory and Society 46(5): 357–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemerinsky, Erwin. 2004. In defence of judicial review: A reply to Professor Kramer. California Law Review 92(4): 1013–1025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, Alessandro. 2018. Can political liberalism help us rescue ‘the people' from populism? Philosophy and Social Criticism 44(4): 463–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Larry. 2004. Popular constitutionalism. California Law Review 92(4): 959–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Jan-Werner. 2016. What is populism?. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pozen, David E. 2010. Judicial elections as popular constitutionalism. Columbia Law Review 110(8): 2047–2134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, Michael. 2018. Populism, liberalism and democracy. Philosophy and Social Criticism 44(4): 353–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, Mark. 1999. Taking the constitution away from the courts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, M. 2006. Popular constitutionalism as political law. Chicago-Kent Law Review 81: 991–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, M. (March 26, 2009). Against judicial review. Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 09-20. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1368857.

  • Tushnet, M. 2015. Authoritarian constitutionalism. Cornell Law Review 100(2): 391–462.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper has been originally presented at the Conference ‘Philosophy and Social Science’ held in Prague in May 16–20, 2018. I want to thank Alessandro Ferrara, Simone Chambers, David Rasmussen, Andrew Buchwalter, Daniel Gamper, Steve Winter, Cristina Lafont, Thomas Claviez, Axel Müller and Benjamin A. Schupmann for comments, questions, suggestions and remarks which helped me to improve this contribution. I am also indebted to the Italian Institute for Philosophical Studies in Naples (Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici), where I am currently a postdoctoral research fellow, for having supporting me in my research activity and for the opportunity to work in a dynamic and intellectually stimulating context.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valerio Fabbrizi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fabbrizi, V. Constitutional Democracy in the Age of Populisms: A Commentary to Mark Tushnet’s Populist Constitutional Law. Res Publica 26, 433–449 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-019-09430-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-019-09430-7

Keywords

Navigation