Congress's Constitution: Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers

Contemporary scholarship and jurisprudence concerning the Constitution's separation of powers is characterized by sharp disagreement about general theory and specific outcomes. The leading theories diverge on how to model the motives of institutional actors; on how to weigh text, history, doctrine, and norms; and on whether to characterize the separation of powers system as abiding in a stable equilibrium or as enthralled by transformative convulsions. Congress's Constitution-an important contribution to theorizing on the separation of powers-provides a platform to step back and isolate these important, if not always candidly recognized, disputes about the empirical and normative predicates of separation of powers theory-predicates that can be usefully grouped under the rubric of "separation of powers metatheory." Unlike much other work in the field, Congress's Constitution directly identifies and addresses the three key metatheoretical questions in play when the separation of powers is theorized. This Review analyzes how it grapples with those profound challenges and tries to articulate a descriptively well fitted and normatively compelling account of our federal government. Evaluating Congress's Constitution from this vantage point offers valuable opportunities for considering the state and direction of academic theorizing on the separation of powers more broadly.