Struggles over amending the U.S. Constitution persist
- Jill Lepore's upcoming book examines the difficulty of amending the U.S. Constitution.
- Experts indicate that the original checks-and-balances system is under unprecedented stress, impacting how governance functions today.
- These complexities highlight the need for ongoing discussions about the document's relevance and adaptability.
The United States Constitution, drafted in the late 18th century, has been pivotal in shaping the country's governance and legal principles. Jill Lepore, a Harvard professor and New Yorker writer, delves into the intricacies of amending this foundational document in her forthcoming book. While amendments have historically enabled the Constitution to adapt alongside societal changes, it is notable that significant alterations have not occurred in over 50 years. Critics have pointed out that the checks-and-balances system established by the founders has faced unprecedented challenges. Experts such as Jeffrey Rosen highlight that the Founding Fathers could not have anticipated the contemporary political landscape and the increasing power of the judiciary. This raises questions about whether the institutional framework is functioning as intended. Lepore's investigation reveals that initial discussions about the Constitution were heavily influenced by historical context, including the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. The Founders intended for a flexible system, as evidenced by the inclusion of an amendment process, allowing future generations to adapt governance to their needs. Impactful compromises, such as those surrounding slavery and women's political rights, cast a shadow over the document's legacy. Crucially, Rosen notes that the Constitution expresses enduring principles of freedom and governance, relevant even in today's context, despite its 18th-century origins.