Writing for the blog of the Law and Political Economy Project, Beau Baumann, a professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law, has a provocative question for would-be left-wing political reformers: What is your theory of constitutional politics?
By “constitutional politics,” Baumann means “a movement or coalition’s core claims about who should wield state power and on what terms.”
As Baumann observes, the most successful political movements in American history typically match their political demands with a theory of who ought to wield power. For Andrew Jackson’s democracy, it was a racially circumscribed polity of white men, whether landowners or laborers, represented by a broad-based political party whose leader — Jackson — could act as the embodiment of their will. For the radical Republicans of Reconstruction, the locus of state power was an almost imperial Congress, which wrote the political and ideological settlement of the Civil War into the constitutional order. And Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal centered power in both a quasi-independent administrative state and a vastly empowered managerial presidency, which also sought to represent the will of the whole people.
The MAGA right, and its tribune, Donald Trump, also has its constitutional politics.
The right, Baumann writes, has chosen to “treat the presidency as the authentic embodiment of popular will, work systematically to sideline Congress, selectively weaken administrative capacity and subordinate the bureaucracy to executive control.”
The MAGA right’s constitutional politics are essentially a neo-Bonapartism, with Trump as the man on horseback. No less than Vice President JD Vance has said as much. Here he is quoted in a 2022 Vanity Fair profile of the new right intellectuals who would eventually coalesce behind Trump in the 2024 presidential election:
“We are in a late republican period,” Vance said later, evoking the common New Right view of America as Rome awaiting its Caesar. “If we’re going to push back against it, we’re going to have to get pretty wild, and pretty far out there, and go in directions that a lot of conservatives right now are uncomfortable with.”
The left, by contrast, has no clear vision of constitutional power and authority. If anything, it remains tied to the New Deal vision of “expertise-based authority and legal liberalism,” which Baumann calls the “dead gods of the New Deal,” essentially closed off by a Supreme Court whose members are deeply hostile to the administrative state. The problem is that to center a theory of power around the executive branch would be to leave a future left-oriented political project vulnerable to conservative reaction.
So where does the left find power? And how does it root this authority in the constitutional order? What, again, are the constitutional politics of the left?
Baumann’s answer is Congress, and so is mine. Last year, I wrote briefly of the need for an imperial Congress, by which I meant a legislature that claims the full suite of powers and prerogatives granted to it under the Constitution.
This would be a Congress that could radically reshape the executive branch, seizing power back from the president. A Congress that could curb, curtail and discipline the Supreme Court. It could marshal public support behind a broad-based political and economic agenda and take a leading role in governing the nation.
It suffices to say that it would take an exceptionally heavy lift to make this transformation a reality. To list just a few of the obstacles: There is the problem of congressional dysfunction, fueled by arcane rules. There is the steady deterioration of Congress’s institutional capacity, its ability to do research, to investigate the state of things in the United States and make laws. There is a deeply corrupt campaign finance regime, which gives the wealthiest Americans the most influence over our politics. And there is the fact that all of this inculcates members of Congress with habits that are more conducive to arguing on TV or posting on X than to working on legislation.
Beyond the issues with Congress, there is also the way that the public itself has grown acclimated and accustomed to uncontested presidentialism and judicial supremacy. The idea that Congress could lead the nation isn’t just foreign to us — it sounds like a fantasy.
It is not enough, then, to devise an agenda around a hypothetical imperial Congress. It is also necessary to rebuild the institution, enhance its esteem and transform the public’s expectations of the sources of political leadership.
A constitutional politics for the left must, in other words, be backed by a mass politics of legislative supremacy. In a largely atomized society of shattered civic bonds, this is much easier said than done.
What I Wrote
I wrote my Wednesday column on the SAVE Act, Trump’s voter identification bill that would, if passed into law, disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans:
For reasons of both ego and ideology, Trump does not believe that he can legitimately lose an election. He is, to his mind, the living embodiment of the nation. If he doesn’t win, then the system must be broken. In that sense, the SAVE Act is far less about American elections as they exist than it is about the president’s vision of American society. The basic premise of Trumpism is that the people of the United States are not the collected citizens of the United States, naturalized and natural born, but a particular caste and class of Americans, defined by race, religion and nationality and united by their devotion to Trump.
I also joined my colleagues David French and Michelle Cottle for another episode of The Opinions.
Now Reading
Katherine Alejandra Cross on Trump’s promise of impunity for Liberal Currents.
Natalie Y. Moore on the Black women that Trump and DOGE purged from the federal government for Hammer & Hope.
Joelle M. Abi-Rached on Israel’s campaign in Lebanon for Boston Review.
Ned Resnikoff on civic virtue, “performative politics” and democracy for The Nation.
Jonathan Alter interviews Tim Weiner on the Iran war for Washington Monthly.
Photo of the Week
Seen in downtown Charleston, S.C.
Now Eating: Roasted Butternut Squash With Lentils and Feta
A relatively simple and very delicious lentil salad. Great for a weekday lunch. Recipe from New York Times Cooking.
Ingredients
For the salad
-
½ cup black or green lentils
-
1 (3-inch) cinnamon stick
-
4 garlic cloves, peeled and smashed
-
Kosher salt
-
1 (1-pound) butternut squash
-
1 tablespoon extra-virgin olive oil
-
½ teaspoon black pepper
-
¼ cup crumbled feta
-
4 scallions, trimmed and thinly sliced
-
2 tablespoons roasted, salted pumpkin seeds
For the dressing
-
¼ cup extra-virgin olive oil or grapeseed oil
-
2 tablespoons pomegranate molasses
-
1 tablespoon honey
-
½ teaspoon ground cumin, toasted
-
¼ teaspoon ground cayenne
-
½ teaspoon black pepper
-
Kosher salt
Directions
Heat oven to 400 degrees. Pick any debris from the lentils, then rinse the lentils under running water. Transfer them to a medium saucepan, then add the cinnamon, garlic and 1 teaspoon salt.
Add enough water to cover everything by 1 inch. Bring the water to a rolling boil over medium-high heat, then reduce to low and let simmer until the lentils are tender but not mushy, about 20 minutes. Drain the lentils, discard the cinnamon and garlic, then transfer the lentils to a large bowl.
While the lentils cook, prepare the squash: Trim and discard the top and bottom ends of the squash. Peel the squash, halve it lengthwise, and remove and discard the strings and seeds. Slice the squash crosswise ¼-inch thick and place the pieces on a baking sheet. Drizzle with 1 tablespoon olive oil and season with salt and pepper.
Roast the squash until completely tender, slightly caramelized and golden brown, about 30 minutes. Remove from the oven, and let cool for 10 minutes. Once cool, add to the lentils.
While the squash cooks, prepare the dressing: In a small bowl, whisk the olive oil, pomegranate molasses, honey, cumin, cayenne and black pepper. Taste and season to taste with salt.
Sprinkle the feta, scallions and pumpkin seeds over the lentils and squash. Pour 2 to 3 tablespoons of the dressing over the lentils and squash. Serve warm or at room temperature, with the remaining dressing on the side.
The post What Is the Left’s Theory of Power? appeared first on New York Times.
