Maxim Constitutionalism: Liberal Equality for the Common Good

Alexander Tsesis

Loyola University Chicago School of Law

February 20, 2013

Texas Law Review, Vol. 92, 2013
Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2013-003

This article argues that the central purpose of U.S. constitutional governance is the protection of individual rights for the common good. Members of all three branches of government must fulfill that public trust through just policies and actions. The maxim of constitutional governance establishes a stable foundation for the rule of law, requiring government to function in a nonarbitrary manner. It provides the people with consistency and predictability about the scope of governmental powers and responsibilities.

The foundational dictate of governance is incorporated into the U.S. constitutional tradition through the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution. Those two documents reflect the national commitment to promulgating laws that are conducive to both the public good and the personal pursuit of happiness. The federal legal system must integrate protections of rights for the common good into statutes, regulations, and judicial opinions that address a plethora of social demands and problems.

The project of maxim constitutionalism runs counter to positivist skepticism about the validity of fundamental constitutional principles. This article seeks to demonstrate that maxim constitutionalism reflects the normative underpinning of legal order that is compatible with pluralistic self-governance. The protection of rights for the common good facilitates the workings of a polity that tolerates debate and deliberation. The administration of laws for the public benefit enjoins tyrannical majoritarianism and abuse of state authority.

Like originalism, maxim constitutionalism utilizes historical analysis. But it departs from originalism by denying that the original meaning of the Constitution’s text should be determinative. Maxim constitutionalism is a binding norm that is independent of any individual mind frame, whether past or present. In addition, though the forward progress of constitutionalism is informed by judicial opinions, it is not defined by them alone. Congress must also play a central role in identifying rights and promulgating statutes for their protection. Recognizing this bedrock purpose of governance distinguishes maxim constitutionalism from prominent strands of living constitutionalism by furnishing an objective and enduring standard for evaluating the legitimacy of governmental actions. The assessment of public conduct is not procedurally neutral but substantively rich in its account of how governmental actors should further the public good through a legal system designed to secure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for an equal citizenry.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 77

Keywords: Constitutional Interpretation, Legal Theory, Rule of Law, Democratic Theory, Republican Theory, Originalism, Living Constitutionalism, Justice, Precedent, Stare Decisis

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: February 21, 2013 ; Last revised: July 20, 2013

Suggested Citation

Tsesis, Alexander, Maxim Constitutionalism: Liberal Equality for the Common Good (February 20, 2013). Texas Law Review, Vol. 92, 2013; Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2013-003. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2221415

Contact Information

Alexander Tsesis (Contact Author)
Loyola University Chicago School of Law ( email )
25 E. Pearson
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
312-915-7929 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 590
Downloads: 106
Download Rank: 174,925

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.375 seconds