Sovereignty, the Corporate Religious, and Jurisdictional/Political Pluralism

Abstract

This paper analyzes the structure of jurisdictional political pluralist thought, its critique of "monist" and "plenary" state sovereignty, its defense of the sovereignty of religious nomos groups and the "exogenous" constraints these allegedly place on civil law. While criticisms of the modernist understanding of state sovereignty have merit, I challenge the neo-medieval alternative proposed by Muniz-Fraticelli and the permeable model offered Abner S. Greene. I argue for a different "post-modern" conception, one that does not relinquish the achievements of democratic constitutionalism, or underestimate the distinctive normative authority of public power and civil law based on democratic legitimacy, the ideal of popular sovereignty and liberal principles of justice.

Keywords: sovereignty, jurisdictional/political pluralism, monism, pluralism, permeable sovereignty, constitutionalism, post-modern sovereignty, democratic legitimacy