Will Bode

Right. And so maybe the realist could say most of the time, I guess Oliver went to Holmes and say this, right? Most of the time I'm talking about law. I mean, the courts will tell the people with guns to come take your stuff and they will do it.

Right. And so maybe the realist could say most of the time, I guess Oliver went to Holmes and say this, right? Most of the time I'm talking about law. I mean, the courts will tell the people with guns to come take your stuff and they will do it.

And in international law, I mean, there are a lot of people with guns, but there's not like one set of, there's not the world sheriff's department that just enforces international law. And in constitutional law, there's not like the separation of powers police that come with guns and like stop people from violating the separation of powers, right? That's the challenge.

And in international law, I mean, there are a lot of people with guns, but there's not like one set of, there's not the world sheriff's department that just enforces international law. And in constitutional law, there's not like the separation of powers police that come with guns and like stop people from violating the separation of powers, right? That's the challenge.

There is this famous thing, the gel man amnesia effect, which is where you read the New York Times when it talks about something you know. You generally believe in the New York Times. You read the New York Times when it talks about something you know. You read the legal stories and you realize they're not very good.

There is this famous thing, the gel man amnesia effect, which is where you read the New York Times when it talks about something you know. You generally believe in the New York Times. You read the New York Times when it talks about something you know. You read the legal stories and you realize they're not very good.

And then somehow you forget this fact and you fail to apply it to all the fields you do know about. And you think, oh, they must know about everything except the thing I know about. And I feel like for a while I was like that about international law. Like when people tried to convince me that international law didn't exist, I was like, oh, okay, sure, that seems right.

And then somehow you forget this fact and you fail to apply it to all the fields you do know about. And you think, oh, they must know about everything except the thing I know about. And I feel like for a while I was like that about international law. Like when people tried to convince me that international law didn't exist, I was like, oh, okay, sure, that seems right.

And then they came and also tried to convince me constitutional law didn't exist. And I was like, well, wait a minute, that doesn't seem right. But it took me a long time to realize those are the same argument. And therefore, if I thought constitutional law did exist, maybe international law exists too. Can we get, though, like an example of how constitutional law is possible?

And then they came and also tried to convince me constitutional law didn't exist. And I was like, well, wait a minute, that doesn't seem right. But it took me a long time to realize those are the same argument. And therefore, if I thought constitutional law did exist, maybe international law exists too. Can we get, though, like an example of how constitutional law is possible?

So how is it that the people with guns, on your view – How is it that the people with guns and money sometimes listened to people without guns and money because of constitutional law?

So how is it that the people with guns, on your view – How is it that the people with guns and money sometimes listened to people without guns and money because of constitutional law?

Many, but let me try this. So it seems like one thing that does distinguish constitutional law from international law is the presence of the Supreme Court. And so it seems like much of constitutional theory is really scholarship about the U.S. Supreme Court and what it has done and what it will do and what it should do. And I don't know if you want it to be dismissive.

Many, but let me try this. So it seems like one thing that does distinguish constitutional law from international law is the presence of the Supreme Court. And so it seems like much of constitutional theory is really scholarship about the U.S. Supreme Court and what it has done and what it will do and what it should do. And I don't know if you want it to be dismissive.

You'd say many pieces that claim to be constitutional theory are really just long essays to the justices about why the justice should do the thing the author wants to do, dressed up in the language that the author thinks the Supreme Court justices want to hear.

You'd say many pieces that claim to be constitutional theory are really just long essays to the justices about why the justice should do the thing the author wants to do, dressed up in the language that the author thinks the Supreme Court justices want to hear.

you could some of it could be better than that but it seems like there is even if it's not the world police exactly and it's there is this question about like well who watches the supreme court who makes the supreme court obey the law it does seem like you have this giant institution frequently engaged in the enterprise of of constitutional law telling everybody else what to do and everybody listens to it and does that does that break the analogy in a way we care about or is there a does that

you could some of it could be better than that but it seems like there is even if it's not the world police exactly and it's there is this question about like well who watches the supreme court who makes the supreme court obey the law it does seem like you have this giant institution frequently engaged in the enterprise of of constitutional law telling everybody else what to do and everybody listens to it and does that does that break the analogy in a way we care about or is there a does that

So can I push this hypo and maybe it'll end up with a different place? So I always love the hypo of, you know, why does the president obey the Supreme Court? Because he has line of first airborne and they don't. But I always like to push it one step further, which is that the president doesn't really have the 101st Airborne either.

So can I push this hypo and maybe it'll end up with a different place? So I always love the hypo of, you know, why does the president obey the Supreme Court? Because he has line of first airborne and they don't. But I always like to push it one step further, which is that the president doesn't really have the 101st Airborne either.