An unfortunate tendency of American constitutional scholarship is to focus on constitutional meaning as expressed by the courts. Whittington argues that this ignores the numerous ways in which political usage and traditions have shaped constitutional meanings, both great and small, in areas that are incapable of judicial elaboration. Whittington calls this process "constitutional construction"; a construction is the constitutional meaning resulting from a political clash. For those familiar with British constitutionalism, this will be familiar because it is similar to the British idea of a constitutional convention.
Whittington examines the constructions that emerged from pivotal political battles. He shows how these political clashes elucidated meaning in issues such as impeachment, judicial independence, and separation of powers, among others. The mixture of history and constitutional theory is similar to that of Ackerman's We The People, but where Ackerman focuses on so-called "constitutional moments" and their results, Whittington examines normal politics and demonstrates how these periods also produce meaningful constitutional understandings. In fact, the meaning elucidated in normal politics may be more important because of the number of them. Anyone interested in history and constitutional politics will find this work intellectually fulfilling.
