Abstract

The essay aims at discussing a theory of constitutionalism which has fostered a strong debate among US legal scholars, i.e. populist constitutionalism, and at understanding the reference to populism made by populist constitutionalists. More in particular, it will be argued that populist constitutionalists contend that the US Constitution shall be interpreted to protect the silent majority against the minority usually holding institutional offices; that it claims a commitment to a strong congruence between public policy and popular opinion; and that it rests on anthropological assumptions benevolent to ordinary people usually denied by the conventional view of constitutionalism.