This posting consists of commentary on Roger Citron’s article, Judge Wilkinson’s Dualist Opinion in Abrego Garcio v. Noem: Judicial Review of Executive Action in a Transformative Time, amplified with information from additional sources related to Bruce Ackerman’s theory of the United States as a dualist democracy.
In his article, Roger Citron revisits Bruce Ackerman’s theory of the United States as a dualist democracy, presenting a timely analysis of how this framework sheds light on current constitutional tensions. Through a close reading of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III’s opinion in Abrego Garcia v. Noem, Citron suggests we may be witnessing an effort at higher lawmaking—a constitutional transformation driven not just by legal arguments, but by political and public realignment.
Ackerman’s concept of dualist democracy, introduced in We the People: Foundations, distinguishes between two modes of governance (Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations 6–8 (1991),