« Solving the Constitutional Crisis | Main | How to Analyze a Film »

January 20, 2006


John M. Kang

Interesting Op-Ed. So, if students really treat the Constitution as religion and its justices as the recipients of revealed truth, then legal realism hasn't done nearly the amount of damage that many presuppose, I guess. Ditto for CLS, or Critical Race Theory, or Feminist Jurisprudence, Law and Economics, or.... Does this mean that today's students (and public) never really subscribed to these "isms" or that they've recovered?

The Constitution, if it is taken as religion by so many, seems to hearken back to an earlier liberal tradition. Here, I'm reminded of Richard Hooker's Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity: "of lawe there can be no lesse acknowledged, then that her seate is the bosome of God...."

There were deeply political and serious reasons for such lofty (and, well, pretty silly) rhetoric. It was meant to establish the now familiar liberal distinction between law v. politics, justification v. power, rights v. arbitrary royal whim.

Is the Constitution--as religion--useful to further these goals? Or do its purportedly religious qualities originate from and further something else like the creation of our nation?

I'd love to hear some responses.

The comments to this entry are closed.