Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:35:33.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Locke on Executive Power and Liberal Constitutionalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2005

Lee Ward
Lee Ward
Affiliation:
Campion College at the University of Regina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. Locke's teaching on executive power is widely seen as one of the most problematic features of his constitutional theory. It is generally interpreted to be either an endorsement of extra-constitutional prerogative or a statement of radical legislative supremacy. However, the primary assumption underlying both of these positions—namely, that Locke saw law and constitution as coextensive—is mistaken. On the contrary, Locke's treatment of executive power illuminates his conception of constitutional authority that is distinct from and superior to normal legislation, but also confines prerogative within fundamental legal limits. Locke thus adumbrated many of the key elements of liberal constitutionalism familiar to us today.

Résumé. On a tendance à voir dans la doctrine de Locke sur le pouvoir exécutif l'un des éléments les plus problématiques de sa théorie constitutionnelle. Le plus souvent, on l'interprète soit comme une validation de la prérogative extra-constitutionnelle, soit comme une expression de suprématie législative radicale. Cependant, l'hypothèse fondamentale sous-jacente à ces deux positions, selon laquelle, pour Locke, loi et constitution seraient coextensives, est erronée. Au contraire, la façon dont Locke traite le pouvoir exécutif met en lumière sa conception d'une autorité constitutionnelle qui est à la fois distincte de la législation normale et supérieure à elle et qui confine, en même temps, la prérogative dans des limites légales fondamentales. Il s'ensuit, donc, que Locke laissait pressentir de nombreux éléments clés du constitutionnalisme libéral que nous connaissons aujourd'hui.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , September 2005 , pp. 719 - 744
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnhart, Larry. 1979. “The ‘God-Like Prince’: John Locke, Executive Prerogative, and the American Presidency.” Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 2 (Spring): 121–30.Google Scholar
Ashcraft, Richard. 1986. Revolutionary Politics and Locke's Two Treatises of Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ashcraft, Richard. 1987. Locke's Two Treatises of Government. London: Allen & Unwin.
Blackstone, Sir William. 1791 [1765]. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Vol. 1. London.
Dunn, John. 1967. “Consent in the Political Theory of John Locke.” The Historical Journal, vol. 10, no. 2: 153–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, John. 1969. The Political Thought of John Locke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farr, James and Clayton Roberts. 1985. “John Locke on the Glorious Revolution: A Rediscovered Document.” The Historical Journal, vol. 28, no. 2 (June): 385–398.Google Scholar
Fatovic, Clement. 2004. “Constitutionalism and Contingency: Locke's theory of Prerogative.” History of Political Thought, vol. 25, no. 2 (Summer): 276–97.Google Scholar
Faulkner, Robert. 2001. “The First Liberal Democrat: Locke's Popular Government.” Review of Politics, vol. 61, no. 3 (Fall): 5–39.Google Scholar
Franklin, Julian. 1978. John Locke and the Theory of Sovereignty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goldie, Mark. 1991. “John Locke and Anglican Royalism.” In John Locke: Critical Assessments, Volume 1, ed. Richard Ashcraft. New York: Routledge, pp. 152–75.
Gough, J.W. 1950. John Locke's Political Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Grant, Ruth. 1987. John Locke's Liberalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Harrison, Ross. 2003. Hobbes, Locke and Confusion's Masterpiece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hobbes, Thomas. 1994 [1651]. Leviathan. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Hume, David. 1985 [1748]. “Of the Original Contract.” Essays Moral, Political and Literary, ed. Eugene Miller. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. Pp. 465–87.
Jefferson, Thomas. 2002 [1785]. Notes on the State of Virginia. New York: Palgrave.
Josephson, Peter. 2002. The Great Art of Government: Locke's Use of Consent. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Kendall, Willmoore. 1941. John Locke and the Doctrine of Majority-Rule. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Locke, John. 1997 [1669]. “The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina.” Political Essays, ed. Mark Goldie. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 160–81.
Locke, John. 1988 [1690]. The Two Treatises of Government, ed. Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Locke, John. 1983 [1689]. Letter Concerning Toleration, ed. James Tully. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Locke, John. 1823 [1676]. “Letter from a Person of Quality.” Works. Volume 108. London: W. Sharpe & Sons: 200–46.
Mabbott, J.D. 1973. John Locke. London: MacMillan.
MacPherson, C.B. 1962. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Madison, James et al. 1961 [1788]. The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter. New York: New American Library.
Mansfield, Harvey. 1989. Taming the Prince: The Ambivalence of Modern Executive Power. New York: Free Press.
Pasquino, Pasquale. 1998. “Locke on King's Prerogative.” Political Theory, vol. 26, no. 2 (April): 198–208.Google Scholar
Rabkin, Jeremy. 1997. “Grotius, Vattel, and Locke: An Older View of Liberalism and Nationality.” Review of Politics, vol. 59, no. 2 (Spring): 293–322.Google Scholar
Scheuerman, William. 2001. “Liberal Democracy and the Empire of Speed.” Polity, vol. XXXIV, no. 1 (Fall): 41–67.Google Scholar
Scott, John. 2000. “The Sovereignless State and Locke's Language of Obligation.” American Political Science Review, vol. 94, no. 3 (September): 547–61.Google Scholar
Seliger, Martin. 1968. The Liberal Politics of John Locke. London: Allen & Unwin.
Simmons, A. John. 1993. The Edge of Anarchy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tarcov, Nathan. 1981. “Locke's Second Treatise and the ‘Best Fence against Rebellion.’” Review of Politics, vol. 43, no. 2 (April): 198–217.Google Scholar
Tuckness, Alex. 2002. Locke and the Legislative Point of View. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tully, James. 1993. An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vile, J.M. 1998. Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers, 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Waldron, Jeremy. 1999. The Dignity of Legislation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Waldron, Jeremy. 1989. “John Locke: Social Contract versus Political Anthropology.” Review of Politics, vol. 51, no. 2 (Winter): 3–28.Google Scholar
Ward, Lee. 2004. The Politics of Liberty in England and Revolutionary America. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Weaver, David. 1997. “Leadership, Locke and the Federalist.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 41, no. 2 (April): 421–46.Google Scholar
Wood, Ellen Meiskins. 1992. “Locke against Democracy: Consent, Representation and Suffrage in the Two Treatises.” History of Political Thought, vol. 13, no. 4 (Winter): 657–89.Google Scholar
Zuckert, Michael. 2002. Launching Liberalism: On Lockean Political Philosophy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.