2004SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

We the British People

Rivka Weill

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This article argues that between 1832 and 1911 the British constitution had operated under popular rather than parliamentary sovereignty. Moreover, that it did so under a model strikingly similar to that of the United States. While under parliamentary sovereignty the legislature is authorized to enact constitutional change, Parliament repeatedly admitted its lack of authority to enact constitutional law and asked the People to determine the fate of the major constitutional issues of the period. This British popular sovereignty model was part of the political rather than legal constitution. The political actors and primarily Parliament, not the courts, enforced this model. We substantiate our claim using both theory and history. Considering theory, we present the British popular sovereignty theory; i.e. the British referendal or mandate theory. Considering history, we describe how the British People, rather than Parliament alone, decided the major constitutional issues of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Since Britain has been considered the archetype of parliamentary sovereignty, this article may revolutionize our understanding of constitutionalism. (This abstract is not part of the official publication of the article in Public Law.)

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article argues that between 1832 and 1911 the British constitution had operated under popular rather than parliamentary sovereignty. Moreover, that it did so under a model strikingly similar to that of the United States. While under parliamentary sovereignty the legislature is authorized to enact constitutional change, Parliament repeatedly admitted its lack of authority to enact constitutional law and asked the People to determine the fate of the major constitutional issues of the period. This British popular sovereignty model was part of the political rather than legal constitution. The political actors and primarily Parliament, not the courts, enforced this model. We substantiate our claim using both theory and history. Considering theory, we present the British popular sovereignty theory; i.e. the British referendal or mandate theory. Considering history, we describe how the British People, rather than Parliament alone, decided the major constitutional issues of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Since Britain has been considered the archetype of parliamentary sovereignty, this article may revolutionize our understanding of constitutionalism. (This abstract is not part of the official publication of the article in Public Law.)

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article argues that between 1832 and 1911 the British constitution had operated under popular rather than parliamentary sovereignty. Moreover, that it did so under a model strikingly similar to that of the United States. While under parliamentary sovereignty the legislature is authorized to enact constitutional change, Parliament repeatedly admitted its lack of authority to enact constitutional law and asked the People to determine the fate of the major constitutional issues of the period. This British popular sovereignty model was part of the political rather than legal constitution. The political actors and primarily Parliament, not the courts, enforced this model. We substantiate our claim using both theory and history. Considering theory, we present the British popular sovereignty theory; i.e. the British referendal or mandate theory. Considering history, we describe how the British People, rather than Parliament alone, decided the major constitutional issues of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Since Britain has been considered the archetype of parliamentary sovereignty, this article may revolutionize our understanding of constitutionalism. (This abstract is not part of the official publication of the article in Public Law.)

Key concepts: Parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament, Constitution, Popular sovereignty, Sovereignty, Constitutionalism, Law, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
We the British People — Research Paper | ScholarLens