In the context of comparative constitutional law, “canon” is an ambiguous concept that can assume very different forms and functions, some of which are profoundly problematic. For purposes of evaluation, it is necessary to distinguish among at least four varieties of “canon”: descriptive, normative, pedagogical, and discursive. The descriptive and normative varieties tend to be constructed in highly path-dependent ways from a very limited population of countries and cases, with the result of perpetuating and reinforcing the blind spots and systematic biases of the field as well as the privileged positions of scholars in Western, English-speaking settings. Conscious pursuit of a comparative constitutional law “canon” for its own sake should therefore be abandoned. The idea of canon might appear at first blush to satisfy the practical need to cull the overabundance of materials generated by an expanding, international, and interdisciplinary field. For pedagogical purposes, time constraints and student needs necessitate highly selective coverage, and for discursive purposes, coordination upon some common conceptual vocabulary is helpful. However, canon in its conventional form is not a satisfactory way of culling materials in either context. Instead, pedagogical and discursive choices should be guided by principles of representativeness and generality. Representativeness includes, among other things, sampling the universe of constitutional experience and materials along all major dimensions of variation, such as region and regime type. Generality entails a preference for a country-neutral and thus more inclusive and universalistic vocabulary: for example, one would discuss the generic concept of “override clauses” rather than the country-specific example of “Canada’s notwithstanding clause,” which in turn facilitates study of the same phenomenon across a broader, more representative sample of jurisdictions.
Contemporary regulation of artificial intelligence is dominated by a powerful intuition: that the risks posed by opaque machine learning systems can...
The past decade has been one of rapid and sweeping changes in international politics and economics. Unlike international trade and investment, the...
Embedded in a recently decided Supreme Court case about Cuba and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act—Exxon Mobil v. Cimex—was a debate about the...
The U.S.-Iran war highlights the underappreciated national security benefits of China’s electrostate strategy.
News headlines regularly announce that...
In earlier work, I discussed historical understandings of the kinds of disputes that Congress can authorize nonjudicial actors to resolve and the...
Although the U.S. Constitution is widely described as lacking enforceable social rights, a recent line of cases from the Ninth Circuit recognizes a...
After an impatient wait, the U.S. Supreme Court finally handed down its opinion in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the tariffs case, on Friday, Feb...
Contractual provisions come in and out of vogue, even in stultifyingly standardised financial instruments. The latest burst of creativity has been...
At points in American history, there have been significant, even massive shifts in constitutional understandings, doctrines, and practices. Apparently...
In a resort-to-force setting, what standard of care must a state follow when using AI to avoid international responsibility for a wrongful act? This...
Scholars regard the 1923 League of Nations experts’ report as the origin of the international tax system as we know it. The experts’ report noted the...
This Chapter discusses citizenship taxation as a potential solution to the challenges posed by increasing global mobility and the digitalization of...
Many disdain the use of consequences in legal interpretation. Yet it turns out that interpreters have long used consequences, particularly...
The chapter provides an introduction to issues involving single people and the law. Accordingly, it explores legal approaches to singlehood and non...
In the name of national security, the Trump administration has taken a stake in Intel, acquired a “golden share” in U.S. Steel, obtained equity stakes...
Treating a tax or tariff as different from a confiscation is an interpretive issue that should be decided by Congress, not the judiciary.
On Nov. 5...
Article II of the Constitution says that “[t]he executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” Of course, the...
Until he joined the U.S. government in 1934, Robert H. Jackson had been a lawyer in private practice in Upstate New York who was admitted to the bar...