THE ROLE OF THE COURTS IN THE POLITICAL CONSTITUTION
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article sketches the beginnings of a theory of what the courts should do in the political constitution. As such, it differs from most of the literature on political constitutionalism (which tends to say more about what courts should not do) and most of the literature about what courts should do in constitutional law (which tends to be framed in a legal constitutionalist perspective). First, arguments are presented about how a political constitutionalist might distinguish between rights which are best left to political institutions and those which better lend themselves to judicial enforcement. Second, the argument is made that in constitutional litigation the courts should focus as much (if not more) on powers and evidence as on rights. The article closes with brief consideration of the legislature's role in the political constitution and of the courts' role in supporting the legislature. Throughout, the article takes the British constitution as its principal case study, but the implications of the argument presented here extend beyond Britain alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it