Abstract. In this introduction to our symposium on “Constitutional Silence,” we situate the articles in this collection and explore the significance of the
The silences of constitutions
Abstract. Glossing a passage from Benjamin Constant’s Reflections on Constitutions, this article first assesses the roles performed by silences, gaps, and
Soundings and Silences
In studying existing constitutions or in assisting with drafting a new one, it is impossible not to notice that formative decisions about what to say and what not to say as a constitution is being created bear heavily on later decisions about how to interpret what a constitution says or fails to say, including whether to construe any given silence or gap only as a source of insight or as a kind of performative utterance. Among the features of the United States Constitution that have been crucial to its success has been the widespread recognition of its connected structure that, despite its gaps—some deliberate and others unintended—invites understanding as a coherent, if at times internally inconsistent, whole. Constitutional silences, like silences of other kinds, are everywhere and come in many varieties. There are as many reasons to be silent as there are to speak and as many ways to hear meaning in the sounds of silence as there are to attribute meaning to statements. The first section of this essay distinguishes silences that open a constitutional conversation by leaving options on the table from those that shut conversation down by limiting the options to one. The second section separates silences that bear on the structure created by the Constitution from those that bear on the individual rights the Constitution protects against government infringement. The third section turns to the special case of silences in the Constitution’s rules of interpretation and asks whether the Supreme Court should be silent on a particular constitutional matter or should address it squarely, recognizing that whatever an authoritative interpreter says about what the Constitution itself says or omits can be evaluated only against the background alternative of somehow contriving to remain silent.
Constitutional Silences and Institutional Integrity
A constitution, like any document, leaves certain things unsaid. In Australia, the duty to interpret constitutional silences falls to the courts. This paper engages with constitutional theory in order to explain what ought to—and does in fact—dwell
The Faux Free Speech Warriors Attacking Free Speech
There’s a particularly insidious and cynical form of censorship gaining prominence in America: the weaponization of “free speech” rhetoric, combined with abuses of the judicial sy…
Silence is a Commons by Ivan Illich
Ivan Illich is doing to computers what he did to education (De-Schooling Society, 1971), to energy (Energy and Equity, 1974), to medicine (Medical Nemesis, 1975), and to sex roles (Vernacular Gender, 1983). Each time it has been radical analysis that changes our perception of what is really going on. Each time, and with growing clarity, it is an economic/historical analysis having to do with the idea of scarcity as a means of exploitation. This article is from Illich's remarks at the "Asahi Symposium Science and Man - The computer-managed Society," Tokyo, Japan, March 21, 1982. The ideas here are part of a book Illich is working on, The History of Scarcity. - Stewart Brand The CoEvolution Quarterly, Winter 1983
Mass surveillance silences minority opinions, according to study
A new study shows that knowledge of government surveillance causes people to self-censor their dissenting opinions online.
Our right to communicate
The first right of any person in any society must be the right to communicate. Without communication there is no way to safeguard our other rights or for us to participate fully in a society. When …
Breaking the silence
Research on science communication has largely focused on teaching scientists how to describe their studies in ways that interest the public while deepening their understanding of scientific exploration. However, there is another, often overlooked side to science communication—how scientists respond when questions arise about the integrity of their research. Often, the tendency has been to stay silent and wait for any controversy to pass or be resolved in professional forums. But in an age of growing, intense attacks on science, silence can be detrimental to both public trust and the careers of scientists who are under scrutiny. For better or worse, journalists, social media professionals, and the public may take a response of “no comment” as a concession that the critics are correct, so forthright communication about research questions is more urgent than ever.
Mind the gap: Analyzing the divergence between constitutional text and constitutional reality
Abstract. Constitutional economics—the analysis of constitutions drawing on the economic approach—has made important progress over the last two decades. Th
Anonymity, Pseudonymity, and Deliberation: Why Not Everything Should Be Connected
Click on the article title to read more.
Anonymity, Pseudonymity, and Deliberation: Why Not Everything Should Be Connected
Click on the article title to read more.
Designing a Constitution for a Community (Camille Canon) : Metagovernance Seminar
This is a talk exploring Apiary's work on the purpose/constitutional design of Radicle. We have been supporting the founders and community in drafting a...
'We won't be silenced': Meta removes Instagram accounts of pro-Palestine advocacy group
Pro-Palestinian activists have complained of suppression of speech since the war on Gaza began on 7 October
Skydance deal allows Trump’s FCC to “censor speech” and “silence dissent” on CBS
FCC now has “never-before-seen controls” over a newsroom, commissioner warns.
How (Not) to Write a Privacy Law
After many years of failed starts, proposed information privacy legislation has begun moving forward in both houses of Congress. The docket in the recently ended 116th Congress was crowded, with a number of different proposals jostling for attention and no agreement on which deserved to be the front runner. Even so, as the 117th Congress begins, there is growing inside-the-Beltway consensus on the list of features that a successful bill will need to include. This paper critically assesses those zones of emerging consensus.
