Questions for discussion:

Sájo & Uitz list several concerns addressed via constitutions and constitution-making. Have they left out anything relevant? Does the constitution-making process and/or the concerns of the drafters behind constitutional provisions have any permanent influence on how we treat the constitution?

Can a liberal constitution contain programmatic provisions, or does their insertion make the constitution “flawed” from the perspective of constitutionalism (p. 37)?

Are constitutions tools for nation-building?

Is naturalisation a process that is completed with acceptance of constitutional principles or assimilation into state culture (in descriptive/normative sense)?

If majority culture becomes state culture as Orgad suggests, is there any justification for majority rights? If it isn’t, what does state culture consist of?

Are cultural defence policies ever defensible from liberal positions?

Does multiculturalism stress or accommodate differences among people? As a result, does it weaken or support individual’s identification with the state and society?

Is it conceivable for a liberal state to have differentiated citizenship status justified by cultural pluralism?

Assigned reading:

Further reading: