Jill Lepore, as summarized here, argues that the Constitution’s hard‑to‑amend structure and recent Supreme Court limits on agency discretion make it nearly impossible to meet modern challenges like climate change. She warns these constitutional constraints pose an 'existential threat' by hindering the administrative state needed for rapid action.
— Casting constitutional design as a barrier to climate governance elevates calls to rewire U.S. institutions from a domestic reform debate to a planetary‑risk imperative.
Tim Brinkhof
2025.10.10
82% relevant
Lepore’s core claim—that Article V’s supermajority thresholds and modern polarization have made the Constitution effectively unamendable—parallels the 'constitutional design blocks modern governance' argument that underpins critiques of climate policy capacity. The article explicitly ties this blockage to reliance on executive power and Supreme Court decisions instead of formal amendments.
Paul Moreno
2025.09.29
100% relevant
The review notes Lepore’s claim that new Court restrictions on the administrative state, combined with formal amendment difficulty, threaten effective climate policy and thus global welfare.
← Back to All Ideas