The UK's decision to leave the EU has opened up huge existential questions for Northern Ireland as it marks its centenary. Constitutional conflict in Northern Ireland had been regarded as largely resolved and settled, but Brexit has altered the wider constitutional framework within which the 1998 Good Friday Agreement is situated. With the question of Irish unity gaining renewed and sustained traction, and with trade, relationships and politics across "these islands" in a state of flux, Northern Ireland approaches a constitutional moment. Murphy and Evershed examine the factors, actors and dynamics that are most likely to be influential, and potentially transformative, in determining Northern Ireland's constitutional future. This book offers an assessment of how Brexit and its fallout may lead to constitutional upheaval, and a cautionary warning about the need to prepare for it.

This book provides an account of the drafting of the Irish Free Constitution of 1922, analysing the document in its historical context and exploring the reasons for its lack of success

John Hearne: Architect of the 1937 Constitution of Ireland is the first-ever biography of the ‘architect in chief and draftsman’ of the constitution. In the six-year period that it took to draft the constitution, John Hearne was involved at every stage alongside Éamon de Valera; his attitudes and concerns – especially with the protection of human rights in a period which saw the rise of dictatorships throughout Europe – governed the make-up of the fundamental law. This law still stands today and reverberates through every call for referendum or repeal. John Hearne is the biography of a man, later Irish Ambassador to Canada and the United States, who masterminded Irish policy, nationally and internationally, for decades; his essential role in the making of the constitution will result in a greater understanding and re-evaluation of one of its most defining and controversial documents.

"New Beginnings" covers Irish constitutional development from Home Rule to the Good Friday Agreement, focusing on turning points where radical constitutional change was discussed, attempted, or implemented. It asks what Irish constitution-makers were trying to do in drafting constitutional documents, or significantly amending existing constitutions. It deals with the 1919, 1922, and 1937 constitutions, debates over the 1937 constitution since 1969, and the 1998 Belfast peace agreement. Taking the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy as its key issue, it asks why Irish politicians have seen constitutions as ways of making democracy more manageable, rather than of furthering democracy. It is intended for students of politics and constitutional law, as well as the general reader, and written in an accessible style that assumes no prior knowledge of Irish constitutional history or law.

A stunning revision of our founding document’s evolving history that forces us to confront anew the question that animated the founders so long ago: What is our Constitution? Americans widely believe that the United States Constitution was created when it was drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1788. But in a shrewd rereading of the Founding era, Jonathan Gienapp upends this long-held assumption, recovering the unknown story of American constitutional creation in the decade after its adoption—a story with explosive implications for current debates over constitutional originalism and interpretation. When the Constitution first appeared, it was shrouded in uncertainty. Not only was its meaning unclear, but so too was its essential nature. Was the American Constitution a written text, or something else? Was it a legal text? Was it finished or unfinished? What rules would guide its interpretation? Who would adjudicate competing readings? As political leaders put the Constitution to work, none of these questions had answers. Through vigorous debates they confronted the document’s uncertainty, and—over time—how these leaders imagined the Constitution radically changed. They had begun trying to fix, or resolve, an imperfect document, but they ended up fixing, or cementing, a very particular notion of the Constitution as a distinctively textual and historical artifact circumscribed in space and time. This means that some of the Constitution’s most definitive characteristics, ones which are often treated as innate, were only added later and were thus contingent and optional.