Courts of many minds

In A Constitution of Many Minds Cass Sunstein argues that the three major approaches to constitutional interpretation - Traditionalism, Populism and Cosmopolitanism - all rely on some variation of a ‘many-minds’ argument. Here we assess each of these claims through the lens of the Condorcet Jury Theorem. In regard to the first two approaches we explore the implications of sequential influence among courts (past and foreign, respectively). In regard to the Populist approach, we consider the influence of opinion leaders. Copyright © 2011 Cambridge University Press.