North Carolina's state constitution charts the evolution over two centuries of a modern representative democracy. In The North Carolina State Constitution, John V. Orth and Paul M. Newby provide an outstanding constitutional and historical account of the state's governing charter. In addition to an overview of North Carolina's constitutional history, it provides an in-depth, section-by-section analysis of the entire constitution, detailing the many significant changes that have been made since its initial drafting. This treatment, along with a table of cases, index, and bibliography provides an unsurpassed reference guide for students, scholars, and practitioners of North Carolina's constitution. Co-authored by Paul M. Newby, a sitting justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court, the second edition includes significant constitutional amendments adopted since the date of the first edition. Almost every article was affected by the changes. Some were minor-such as the lengthening the term of magistrates-and some were more significant, such as spelling out the rights of victims of crimes. One was obviously major: granting the governor the power to veto legislation-making North Carolina's governor the last American governor to be given that power. In addition, the North Carolina Supreme Court has continued the seemingly never-ending process of constitutional interpretation. Some judicial decisions answered fairly routine questions about the powers of office, such as the governor's clemency power. Others were politically contentious, such as deciding the constitutional constraints on legislative redistricting. And one continues to have momentous consequences for public education, recognizing the state's constitutional duty to provide every school child in North Carolina with a "sound, basic education." The Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States is an important series that reflects a renewed international interest in constitutional history and provides expert insight into each of the 50 state constitutions. Each volume in this innovative series contains a historical overview of the state's constitutional development, a section-by-section analysis of its current constitution, and a comprehensive guide to further research. Under the expert editorship of Professor G. Alan Tarr, Director of the Center on State Constitutional Studies at Rutgers University, this series provides essential reference tools for understanding state constitutional law. Books in the series can be purchased individually or as part of a complete set, giving readers unmatched access to these important political documents.

According to the traditional understanding of American constitutional law, the Revolution produced a new conception of the constitution as a set of restrictions on the power of the state rather than a mere description of governmental roles. Daniel J. Hulsebosch complicates this viewpoint by arguing that American ideas of constitutions were based on British ones and that, in New York, those ideas evolved over the long eighteenth century as New York moved from the periphery of the British Atlantic empire to the center of a new continental empire. Hulsebosch explains how colonists and administrators reconfigured British legal sources to suit their needs in an expanding empire. In this story, familiar characters such as Alexander Hamilton and James Kent appear in a new light as among the nation's most important framers, and forgotten loyalists such as Superintendent of Indian Affairs Sir William Johnson and lawyer William Smith Jr. are rightly returned to places of prominence. In his paradigm-shifting analysis, Hulsebosch captures the essential paradox at the heart of American constitutional history: the Revolution, which brought political independence and substituted the people for the British crown as the source of legitimate authority, also led to the establishment of a newly powerful constitution and a new postcolonial genre of constitutional law that would have been the envy of the British imperial agents who had struggled to govern the colonies before the Revolution.