E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Consider the following as a candidate for “normalization” or
the “new political correctness.”
Globalization is inevitable. This inevitable globalization as inevitably produces
and exacerbates severe economic inequality.
No sane political actor can do anything about this rising inequality nor
should any sane political actor want to seriously combat this rising
inequality. The only legitimate subject
for debate is whether natural processes will ensure that some benefits
of globalization trickle down to less fortunate citizens (Republicans) or
whether some government intervention is necessary to ensure that most persons
enjoy at least some benefits of globalization (Democrats).
On the one hand, I do not think I will be thrown out of the
next faculty meeting, nor be allowed to renew my membership in the American
Political Science Association nor otherwise become a pariah if I question
whether government should not and cannot make efforts to combat the severe
economic inequalities caused by globalization. On the other hand, I am struck
by the way that a major effort was made to place Bernie Sanders out of the
mainstream in large part because he was the only candidate for the presidency
who questioned the above candidate for political correctness. As the opprobrium attached to "class warfare," issues of economic inequality have taken a back seat
when the subject turns to the present crisis of American constitutional
democracy.
The immediate constitutional crisis may be some combination
of the election of Donald Trump, who fails to meet any constitutional standard
for the presidency, save a technical victory under the rules governing
presidential election, and a Republican Party that combines Trump’s disdain for
basic science with a preference for code words as opposed to Trump’s more
explicit bigotry. The long term
constitutional crisis is that the United States (and many constitutional
democracies elsewhere) are experiencing levels of economic inequality that most
empirical theories suggest are inconsistent with the practical operation of
constitutional democracy.
Constitutional democracy functions best when the vast
majority of citizens have several characteristics. First, they are sufficiently well off that
life normally is not limited by the struggle to maintain a decent living space,
maintain a healthy diet and lifestyle, and provide one’s children with the education
they will need to maintain a decent living space, etc. Second, they are nevertheless not immune to
the vagaries of the economic cycle. Most citizens have good faith reasons for
thinking their lives may be transformed into a struggle for basic necessities during
an economic downturn, but that they may be able to leave that struggle for basic
necessities far behind during an economic upturn.
The United States increasingly lacks these prerequisites of
a constitutional democracy. A small but
increasing number of Americans (myself included) know about economic downturns
only from the newspapers (or, increasingly, the internet). An increasing majority of Americans live
lives that consist or more or less successful struggles for basic necessities,
without much hope that an economic upturn will do more than increase the
probability that those struggles will be temporarily successful and without much hope that their children will do much more than struggle for basic necessities. We live, in short, in Ronald Reagan’s
universe, a universe in which the right to become rich that Reagan trumpeted so frequently has become at least of equal importance to the right to live a fully
human life. In this universe, the
institutions of constitutional democracy, which allow ordinary persons to
influence politics have become enfeebled.
Restoring constitutional democracy is less a matter of getting rid of
the class clown as president than restoring such institutions as unions that
enabled ordinary people to help shape policies aimed at created the economic perquisites
for citizens of a constitutional democracy.