What should we do when those who wield power fail?  In a subtle and nuanced analysis, Michaela Hailbronner tackles this question with insight and originality.  Drawing on case studies from comparative constitutional law, the European Union, and international law, Hailbronner makes a powerful case that we need to take institutional failure seriously – not just as a cause for lament or an automatic licence to deviate from established legal norms, but as a stimulus for a more measured, proportionate, and context-specific approach.  In a time of widespread democratic dysfunction and political failure, all public lawyers will benefit from engaging with Hailbronner’s illuminating and compelling arguments.

The theory and practice of constitutionalism are filled with arguments, but not all have been adequately captured. This brilliant and imaginative work underscores how legal efforts are often a response to our broken institutional reality. The Failures of Others not only clarifies our doctrinal landscape – it offers us a new way to inform and shape our constitutional future.

Institutions fail in ways that spell bad news for a project of democratic constitutionalism – but can also provide invaluable lessons for scholars and practitioners looking to promote future institutional success.  In the here and now, the failure of one institution is also a powerful reason for other institutions to step up and in to uphold constitutional norms -and Hailbronner constructs a sophisticated account of what this kind of failure-sensitive approach to judicial review might look like at a domestic and transnational level. The book should be compulsory reading for all those interested in the future of constitutionalism nationally and transnationally.

Michaela Hailbronner has written an exceptional and well-argued book, in which she studies the problem of institutional failure. She does so in a very attractive way, particularly for those of us interested in comparative political process theory, concerned about the (tragic) phenomenon of ‘authoritarian erosion’, and still hopeful about structural reform litigation.