Introduction to Constitutional Resources

The sad truth is that when two scholars looked at over 20 years of data to compare American public opinion with the likelihood that policies will become laws they discovered that public opinion has no impact on legislators. And it is worse than that. They looked at the impact the opinions of the rich and business lobby groups have on legislation. You guessed it. What the rich want, they get. This video summarizes their results:

The study was not specifically looking at race, but the majority of people of color are included in those who have no influence. How is this possible when we call the United States of America a democracy? Mary Anne Franks explains in her book, “The Cult of the Constitution,” “We are facing a continuing crisis of constitutional inequality. For more than two hundred years, the lion’s share of legislative, judicial, political, and social resources has been devoted to protecting the constitutional rights of white men above all others … It is hardly surprising, then, that the picture of who holds power today does not look that different from 1787” (pgs. 34 & 30). There is a review of her book – “Mary Anne Franks’ Book on the Constitution” – on this website.

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt have written two books (reviewed on this site in “Tyranny in America”) that make an irrefutable case that the current state of America is the result of our Constitution and structure of government. They boldly say, “it is a simple fact: many of America’s venerated political institutions are not very democratic; indeed, they are not made for democracy” (“Tyranny of the Minority,” pg. 137).

The call to fix the Constitution comes for people of all political persuasions. Sarah Isgur, Justice Department spokeswoman during the Trump administration, points out in her opinion article, “It’s Time to Amend the Constitution” in Politico, that, "... today, thanks in large part to growing negative partisanship and shrinking Congressional interest in doing anything, the amendment process has been relegated to the dust heap while our national problems – from climate change to an outdated immigration system – pile up without political accountability. The resulting constitutional stagnation is a threat to the Republic – one that should scare you even if you think the Supreme Court has gotten every decision right (narrator: it hasn’t). We need to amend the amending.”

In an article in The American Prospect on January 29, 2024, David Dayen argues, “The larger crisis we now face is not solely attributable to an individual with malign intent for our government; it’s more about the system of government itself.” The title of the article is America Is Not a Democracy. He not only explains how America fails to be a democracy, but he also reviews suggestions of ways the structure of the government could be more democratic.

There are objections to the suggestion that one of the things which is necessary to end racism is to rewrite the Constitution. One objection is that with the political climate in the 21st century, an attempt to change the Constitution could result in something far worse than what we have today. What if a new Constitution solidified white privileges? The very frightening movement to strip the Constitution of its ability to protect civil and human rights is described in the article, “The One Percent Are Planning to Re-Write the Constitution.”

This possibility needs to be taken seriously, but there is extensive research that shows the American people are not as divided as the media suggests. And historical analysis of previous modifications to the Constitution suggests that it is at times like these when meaningful constitutional reforms have been possible. In a Politico article, “History Teaches that Constitutional Reforms Come in Waves,” John F. Kowal and Wilfred U. Codrington III ask, “What if it turns out that it’s gridlock and partisanship that open a path for constitutional reform?”

The Constitution, as originally written, is designed to create a Republic with the land-owning men taking responsibility for the government and the states free to make their own laws regarding things like slavery. But, since 1789, there have been changes with amendments, laws, and customs. Two authors have written books that begin with strong criticisms of the Constitution. Then, rather than suggesting that we fix the flaws, they both propose that we use the Constitutional language as the basis for an equitable society. In Mary Anne Franks’ book, “The Cult of the Constitution”, she concludes that the words of the 14th amendment can be used to address the deficiencies of the Constitution. Elie Mystal, in “Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution,” proposes a broader reinterpretation of the Constitution. He suggests, “redeeming our failed Constitution from its bigoted and sexist sins does not require new amendments … It requires the emerging majority in this country to reject the conservative interpretation of what the Constitution says and adopt a morally defensible view of what our country means.”

Social justice issues besides racism are stymied because of the way power is organized by the Constitution. Articles on this website discuss two examples: gun safety and abortion rights. There is also an article on critical race theory that touches on difficulties that need to be overcome to create a nation without racism. Brenda Girton-Mitchell points out that the voting rights and the Constitution are connected. And there is an article that describes how Article V of the Constitution makes it possible to change the structure of our government without a violent revolution. Ending Racism USA has prepared resources for Constitution Day.

We invite you to participate in the conversation as we all work together to build a future America where structures, institutions, and individual biases do not create barriers that are greater for one person than for another and where all identity groups have full participation in the political, cultural, and economic life of the nation.