Why Does the American Constitution Lack Social and Economic Guarantees

By Cass R. Sunstein. 2003

197 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Why does the American Constitution lack certain social and economic guarantees, which appear in most contemporary constitutions? This essay explores four possible answers: chronological, cultural, institutional, and realist. The chronological explanation emphasizes the fact that in the late eighteenth century, social and economic rights simply were not on the viewscreen for constitution-makers. The point is correct, but as a complete account, the chronological explanation fails for the simple reason that constitutional meaning changes over time. The institutional explanation emphasizes that Americans typically see constitutional rights not as mere goals or aspirations, but as pragmatic instruments for judicial enforcement. The difficulty with the institutional explanation is that social and economic rights can, in fact, be enforced judicially. The cultural explanation sees the absence of social and economic rights as part of the general failure of socialist movements in the United States ("American exceptionalism"). The problem with this explanation is that social and economic rights can in fact coexist with a market economy. The realist explanation places a spotlight on the underappreciated fact that the United States Supreme Court came very close, in the 1960s and 1970s, to recognizing social and economic rights under the Constitution. The Court's refusal to recognize such rights was largely a result of the presidential election of 1968 and in particular of four critical appointments by President Nixon. This is an important source of "American exceptionalism" in the domain of social and economic rights. Here as elsewhere, there is a possibility of multiple equilibria, and with a small difference or two, the United States might well have had an equilibrium that included social and economic rights.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Law, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/68745fbe3a52e6a3fc25b9f7ff4937c226a263d4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Law

In Political Science and International Relations

Citations in the corpus

Exclusionary Amenities in Residential Communities (2005, background): “Wealthy owners of Manhattan cooperative apartments seem willing to pay a hefty premium and sacrifice substantial leisure time and a great deal of financial privacy at the time of purchase, all for the benefits of exclusivity and having a much greater say in who their neighbors are.(36) For money-is-”
Willingness to Pay versus Welfare (2007, background): “conceived, if A prefers to take actions that do not promote his welfare, narrowly conceived.(36) The standard economic emphasis on people’s subjective preferences has the considerable advantage of attending to what people care about, whether or not their”
The Judiciary Is a They, Not an It: Two Fallacies of Interpretive Theory (2003, background): “A standard criticism of such information-eliciting or deliberation-forcing rules is that they rest upon mistaken empirical premises about legislative behavior and capacities.(36)”
Information Asymmetries and the Rights to Exclude (2005, background): “The Mulligan court had a harder time determining whether the restrictions were contrary to public policy.(36)”
The Credibility Imperative: The Political Dynamics of Retaliation in the World Trade Organization's Dispute Resolution Mechanism (2005, unknown): “Faced with even more concentrated prohibitive sanctions, the EC capitulated and decided to settle the dispute in 2001.(36) One significant caveat: the efficacy of a well-calibrated retaliation strategy may depend on whether it addresses primarily protectionist trade restrictions.”
Ideological Voting on Federal Courts of Appeals: A Preliminary Investigation (2004, unknown): “Let us start with affirmative action, which shows the basic pattern of results as in the aggregate data (Figure 2).(36) From 1980 through 2002, Republican appointees cast 267 total votes, with 127, or 48%, in favor of upholding an affirmative action policy.”
The Sympathetic Discriminator: Mental Illness and the ADA (2004, background): “The statute itself defines, as one form of having a “disability,” the status of being “regarded as” disabled by others.(36) Second, the current doctrinal debates over the ADA call for such efforts at varied position-taking.”
Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life-Life Tradeoffs (2005, background): “But most modern deontologists reject this position, instead admitting a consequentialist override to baseline deontological prohibitions.(36) Although the threshold at which the consequentialist override is triggered varies with different accounts, we will suggest below that if each execution deters”