Professor Jonathan Turley
83 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 305
This Article is the first interdisciplinary work exploring architectural and
constitutional theories of interpretation. This “conarchitectual” perspective is
used to explore the concepts of form and function in both disciplines to better
understand the meaning of structure. While form and function are often referenced
in legal analysis, there is little work on the inherent meaning of structure.
Constitutional structure is often treated as an instrumental rather than a
normative element in modern conflicts. This Article challenges that view and
suggests that the Madisonian system is a case of “form following function” in
core elements like the separation of powers and federalism. This Article explores
the influence of scientific and philosophical theories on the structure of
government for Madison. These “Madisonian tectonics” give constitutional
structure a normative or deontological value that should frame interpretive
analysis. Indeed, the Article explores the role of constitutional structure as a
type of “choice architecture” in shaping choices and directing actions within
the system. In a conarchitectural approach, an understanding of form and
function can lead to a fading of those distinctions—as it did for modernist
architect Mies van der Rohe. What emerges is a more consistent and coherent
approach to constitutional interpretation that is based on structuring truth behind
a design. This Article traces the influences of structure from Madison to
Mies to better understand the truth in the meaning of architectural and constitutional
structure.
