Abstract

Constitutionally protected rights remove political issues from the control of the democratically elected legislature. Since such rights therefore limit the power of the majority, recent work in rights theory argues that the constitutional protection of rights is inconsistent with the fundamental democratic idea of government by the people. According to this view, democracies should assign the power to resolve questions regarding the nature and extent of individual rights to the majority. Constitutional attempts to remove such questions from the public agenda, it is argued, are disrespectful to citizens who disagree with the views embodied in the constitutionalized rights. I argue that this critique: is insufficiently attentive to the question of when legislation by the majority constitutes a legitimate exercise of political power; and underestimates the importance of securing the constitutive conditions of democratic self-government.