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
The purpose of this post is to call attention to an excellent new article in the Yale Law Journal by Gregory Ablavsky. It's called Empire States: The Coming of Dual Federalism. The citation is 128 YLJ 1792, or you can just find it here:
Without attempting to explain everything that makes this article worth reading, I'll offer this: Ablavsky argues that the conventional view of the Founding as a moment when the Founders "split the atom of sovereignty" gets a major piece of the story backwards. In practice, the major change in the structure of sovereignty worked by the adoption of the Constitution was not the replacement of a system whereby sovereignty was lodged in a single location to one where it was divided between state and national governments. Instead, the Founding was a moment when the number of places where sovereign power was located was definitively *reduced* to only two (i.e., the state and national governments). Before that moment, Ablavsky points out, states were not as practical matters the wielders of sovereign authority. On the ground, they competed with a dizzying array of other wielders of power--towns, counties, juries, churches, corporations and charter companies, secessionists and insurrectionists, and so on. Seen from this perspective, a major piece of the Constitution's work was to enlist national power in the service of making states sovereign in practice for the first time by putting the overwhelming force of the national government behind the state governments as against those other contenders.
I make no effort to convey Ablavsky's argument in full here, let alone to defend it. That's what the article is for. My point here is simply that people who want to understand this subject matter should read the article. This work is something with which the field must grapple seriously. Posted
9:24 PM
by Richard Primus [link]