Balkinization |
Balkinization
Balkinization Symposiums: A Continuing List 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 Rahman sabeel.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 Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts The Unbearable Lightness of Process in the Empire of Substance
|
Wednesday, November 13, 2024
The Unbearable Lightness of Process in the Empire of Substance
Guest Blogger
For the Balkinization symposium on Kunal Parker, The Turn to Process: American Legal, Political, and Economic Thought, 1870–1970 (Cambridge University Press, 2023). John Fabian Witt In one sense, the triumph of the procedural in twentieth-century legal theory is a puzzling phenomenon. In 1980, at what was perhaps the high point for the so-called process school of constitutional law led by John Hart Ely, critics like the liberal Laurence Tribe and the leftist Mark Tushnet objected that process stories in legal theory obscured underlying substantive commitments. Value-free adjudication based in process, to use Tushnet’s formulation, was impossible; process-perfecting theories, in Tribe’s words, could not banish the fights over substance that had brought them into being. After all, what could explain the selection of one or another process other than the pursuit of some substantive social project?[1] Yet dealing directly in substantive truths, alluring as it may be, quickly runs into difficulties of its own. In legal theory, substantive visions for how we should live together run headlong into a problem of justification. In his book’s stage-setting sections, Parker tries to sketch an old world of foundations and substance. But the old world, purportedly before process, gave an awful lot of attention to process questions. In law, arguably the most important development of the nineteenth century was the conversion from the old common law writ system to the Field Code system of pleading. Famously, both of these were procedural systems (or, in the archaic variation, “adjective law”). Parker describes the common law as a historical accumulation of customs. But that was and is a highly ideological, even tendentious description of the field. The common law might better have been described as a process for deciding when the king’s sword could be deployed in the resolution of disputes. Henry Sumner Maine certainly thought so when he wrote that in the common law’s crabbed writ system method “substantive law” was “gradually secreted in the interstices of procedure.”[2] The Field Code, in turn, carried a focus on the procedural into the modern era. David Dudley Field prepared codifications of virtually the entire common law. But it was only in the domain of procedure that his work became law.[3]Analytically, the underlying descriptive challenge for Parker is that virtually all observable phenomena are susceptible to characterization both as states, on the one hand, and as processes, on the other. Most things are both at once. At least since Darwin, life has been describable as a process. But of course it is also a condition. Falling in and out of love is a process. But joy and heartache are truths. In law, the point emerges from the highly technical line of cases every first year student learns. Beginning with the landmark 1938 decision in Erie v. Tompkins, it became crucial for the lower federal courts to decide whether an issue was substantive or procedural. But of course the courts could barely even begin to do so. The questions at issue were both at once. As in life and love, the answer depended on how the courts chose to frame the problem.[4] Parker’s leading examples of the proceduralism of twentieth-century social theory share this same deep duality of process and substance. He invokes Alexander Meiklejohn’s famous theory of free speech as a procedural value in self-government.[5] But, of course, democracy is a principle as well as a procedure. The meeting of supply and demand is a process. But prices are an equilibrium state. Pluralism in political science contemplates government as a process of interactions among groups. But peaceful coexistence in a political unit offers itself as an ideal state of being. Ely offered “green pastel redness” as the reductio absurdum of the notorious doctrine of substantive due process. But the doctrine’s mash-up of method and foundations may in the descriptive sense be true to the doubleness of legal theory. Substantive due process’s multitudinousness appears in this sense to be a feature, not a bug.[6] * * * Parker’s project is to ask what it means when social and legal theory chooses one of these two available modes of description and analysis. What is entailed in giving pride of place to the process frame over the substance frame? One thread that runs through the book, though mostly implicitly, is the centrality of capitalism’s structuring role. The long chapter on the turn to process in economic thought bears this out most clearly, but in a deeper sense the entire book is set against the ceaseless churn of modern capitalism’s creative destructive. It is, Parker tells us on more than one occasion, the condition of constant change that leads we moderns to make recourse to process as a way of making sense of and managing the world in flux around us. It’s as if thinking in processes rather than foundations is a mechanism of grappling with the social acceleration of modern capitalism.[7] For my part, I might have been inclined to emphasize two additional features of modernity, namely globalization and democracy, each of which made salient a collateral artifact, disagreement. In this respect, process bids to be the master principle not merely of the past century and a half, but of the last half-millennium. Parker assimilates John Rawls to the procedural universe, and the truth is that the entire social contract tradition stretching back to Grotius and Hobbes advanced a procedural model of social relations. In Grotius’s version, in particular, the laws of war and peace among of nations arises out of the thought-experiment of a hypothetical process based of rational agreement. Something of the same structure is evident in the treaty-like features of the U.S. Constitution, where James Madison’s Federalist 10 famously contemplates the Constitution as constructing a process in which the ambitions of factions cancel one another out. * * * One of the most valuable features of Parker’s book is its illustration of the many purposes to which the process frame can be, and has been, put. The turn to process served to legitimate the rising administrative state, where the administrative process could do much of the work of the legal process. Yet the process fixation also became a mechanism by which critics articulated and advanced objections to administration’s supposed tyranny. The scientific method embodied in Kenneth and Mamie Clark’s psychology underwrote Brown v. Board of Education. But the rise of a legal process school that aimed to manage the temporality of change (a wonderful Kunal Parker formulation) also licensed Brown II’s “all deliberate speed” slowdown. Process theory undergirded Thorsten Veblen’s critique of the marketplace – and also helped build Hayek’s fantasy of a perfect market machine for processing information about human desire. There are a few stray awkwardnesses in The Turn to Process, though they are generative interpretive provocations rather than errors. I am not at all sure that the nineteenth-century of the Field Code and the Due Process Clause was an era of foundational truths. By the same token, twentieth century legal theory fought hard over contested truth claims even as it undoubtedly elevated the processes for milling them into a workable social order. When the early Frankfurter delivered The Public and Its Government at Yale in 1930, his administrative state solution to the remoteness of truth in modernity’s Great Society was not based on process but expertise.[8] A decade later, when he wrote the decision in Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940), he was (pace Parker) not celebrating Burkean proceduralism or championing a legal process of institutional competences. At least he was not primarily doing these things. More than anything, he was an immigrant binding himself to the flag of patriotism.[9] My forthcoming project on the social mobilizations and ideas that coalesced between the wars proposes a view diametrically opposite to the one Parker puts on offer here. Parker’s big picture story is about the rise of process and uncertainty as a master principle for the twentieth century American legal and social thought. And who can doubt that pragmatisms and proceduralisms helped legal elites manage the massive social change of the first modern century? If, however, we want to understand the ideas and movements with which the system managers found themselves grappling, we will be back to fierce conflict among rival foundational claims. It was surging interwar social movements of labor and race liberation and civil liberties that remade American law in the twentieth century. And they appealed not to processes but to new truth claims, which they asserted and forced onto the national stage. At the book’s end, Parker disclaims that his book is a jeremiad for the lack of substance. It is not, he writes, a declension story about loss. In a sense, he is right. The book is too thoughtful to adopt the tendentious interpretation of pragmatism that John Patrick Diggins (with whom Parker begins his book) trotted out three decades ago. Process has virtues and vices, Parker tells us, and his book is an interpretation of social theory in the era in which process bid for hegemony. Yet I couldn’t help but feel upon reaching the end and reluctantly putting the volume down that it embodies something of the yearning and the ache of the alienated social theorists it describes. What Parker’s social theorists really want, in their heart of hearts, is a millennium—a resting place against the ceaseless current, a destination in which fundamental truths might at last express themselves. Perhaps an equilibrium, to use the language of Parker’s economists, would suffice, or maybe a mere waystation. The stark beauty of Parker’s book is that it offers us the journey. John Fabian Witt is Allen H. Duffy Class of 1960 Professor of Law at Yale Law School. You can reach him by e-mail at john.witt@yale.edu. [1]
Tribe, The Puzzling Persistence of Process-Based Constitutional Theories, 89
Yale L.J. 1063 (1980); Tushnet, Darkness on the Edge of Town: The Contributions
of John Hart Elu to Constitutional Theory, 89 Yale L.J. 1037 (1980). [2]
Henry Turner Maine, On Law and Early Custom 389 (1883). [3]
Kellen Funk & Lincoln Mullen, “The Migration of the Field Code,” SocArXiv
Papers, https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/nfg92.
[4]
John Hart Ely, The Irrepressible Myth of Erie, 87 Harv. L. Rev. 693, 695
(1974). [5]
Alexander Meiklejohn Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-Government (1948). [6]
John Hart Ely, Democracy and Distrust 18 (1980). [7]
Hartmut Rosa, Social Acceleration: A New Theory of Modernity (Jonathan
Trejo-Mathys, trans., 2013). [8]
I try to make this point in chapter 17 of my forthcoming book, The Radical
Fund: How a Band of Visionaries and a Million Dollars Upended America, which
will be out in the fall of 2025. [9]
Brad Snyder, Democratic Justice: Felix Frankfurter, the Supreme Court, and the
Making of the Liberal Establishment 350-61 (2022). Posted 9:30 AM by Guest Blogger [link]
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers ![]() Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) ![]() David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin’s Press, 2022) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) ![]() Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). ![]() Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) ![]() Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) ![]() Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) ![]() Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) ![]() Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) ![]() Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution ![]() Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) ![]() Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) ![]() Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) ![]() Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) ![]() Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic ![]() Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) ![]() David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) ![]() Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |