Every so often I get these weird intellectual obsessions. As I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, lately I’ve been interested in learning more about the British constitutional system, how it was created, how it influenced the creation of the American constitutional system, and how the two systems differ. It just seemed odd to me that (1) the British constitutional system is not all written down in one place, and (2) Parliament is completely sovereign, without any checks on its power such as judicial review.

Yesterday I read a law review article about it: Lord Irvine of Lairg, Sovereignty in Comparative Perspective: Constitutionalism in Britain and America, 76 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 1 (2001), if you’re interested.

I also read a somewhat lengthy review of a book called The Sovereignty of Parliament: History and Philosophy.

And the other day I finished reading (although I skimmed much of it) Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution by Forrest McDonald, and I’ve ordered Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution, by Jack Rakove, which won a Pulitzer a few years ago.

I took a bunch of con law classes in law school – it was probably my favorite subject, and it nicely complemented my history major from college. So I guess it shouldn’t be surprising that I’m interested in this stuff. Anyway, soon enough I’ll get sick of this and move onto something else.