| At least five times in American history, major developments in American constitutional law have occurred that cannot be reconciled, prima facie, with the textual requirements for amendment of the United States Constitution. These developments also have correlated with "critical realignments" in American politics, phenomena in which exceptionally mobilized electorates respond to divisive issues by transforming the shape of public policy. In light of the degree of electoral participation and deliberation generally characteristic of realignments, features of the American political process common across critical realignments might serve as the basis for a reliable explanatory theory of popular sovereignty in the United States. This dissertation tests the politics of five critical realignments for the degree of participation and deliberation tantamount to that implicated by constitutional amendment procedures. |
