I thought I’d do some process posts for those who might be interested. My next article (not yet begun) will be “The Real Unitary Executive Problem,” which is that America does not separate the head of state from the head of government. Why did I pick that? Where did that idea come from?
Some articles are the result of longstanding curiosity. In law school, I wrote a mediocre paper arguing that some of the then-new democracies in Eastern Europe ought to bring back their royal houses to serve as titular heads of state. Part of the motivation was my fascination with Bagehot’s book on The English Constitution and its discussion of the “dignified” and “efficient” elements of a political order. I’ve returned to that source many times over the years.
Another factor in topic selection is whether I can accumulate enough “Gee whiz” facts to sustain a paper. A decade ago, I started writing a paper on the same issues that I will write about now. I abandoned (though did not discard) that project because I did not have enough fresh material. Put another way, my approach tends to be inductive, but it must be inductive enough. Now I’ve found more and enough more to my satisfaction.
Circumstances also influence topic selection. The current President highlights the problem of not separating the head of state and head of government roles. So did the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.
New projects tends to build upon the previous one. In writing about Justice Jackson’s Youngstown concurrence, I talked about his discussion of the President’s prestige as head of state and head of party as informal sources of influence over public opinion. That lends itself to a separate power about the head of state role itself.
Finally, there appears to be a gap in the literature here on this topic. I find that attractive in topic selection for books and articles.
Next post will be about why I don’t pursue certain topics.