When we talk about “the Great American Experiment,” we usually speak as though it were deliberate — as though the Founders had a blueprint and set out to design the most ambitious government in human history. But that narrative is backwards.
The Founders did not plan an experiment. They found themselves inside one.
Identity Before Governance
The first constitutions drafted by the newly independent states were less about governance and more about identity. These were not technical manuals for running governments. They were declarations of being; documents that said, this is who we are now.
Their purpose was to mark the break with Britain and to enshrine in writing that sovereignty now resided with the people. Rights were listed not so much to protect against imminent abuse, but to announce a new political identity to the world and to one another.
Governance Was an Afterthought
Because identity was the focus, the structures of government that emerged were often improvised, inconsistent, and in some cases, deeply flawed. Many states simply repurposed colonial charters or borrowed heavily from English models. The first national framework — the Articles of Confederation — reflected this mindset. It preserved state sovereignty above all else and offered little in the way of actual governing power.
For a time, this seemed enough. The Revolution had been won, independence secured, and the idea of a strong central government still made many nervous. But the weaknesses of the Articles quickly became obvious: Congress couldn’t regulate trade, enforce laws, or even reliably pay soldiers. Governance — neglected at first — now demanded urgent attention.
When Crisis Forced the Question
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 was not the final act of a carefully laid plan. It was a response to a national crisis. Only when the Articles failed did governance become the central concern. In that sense, the Constitution was not so much invented as discovered.
By trial and error, the states had learned what would not work. By 1787, they were ready to design something that might. The result was not perfect — it never is when humans are involved — but it has endured longer than any other written constitution in history.
We Are Still Part of the Experiment
If we did not plan this experiment, then we are not its masters — we are its participants. That means we are not at liberty to bend it to our will, as some among us, seem to think they can.
And that raises deeper questions: Who planned this experiment? And who is running it now?
The best answer may be that the experiment was planned by the same force that orders the natural world — by Providence, or by what the Founders themselves called “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” The Constitution, viewed in this light, is not merely a human invention but a discovery: a record of principles waiting to be recognized.
And who runs the experiment? Not any one person or party — not even the Supreme Court — but the Constitution itself. Its structure contains what I call the Hydraulic Constitutional Force (HCF): a self-correcting mechanism that resists distortion and rebalances the system over time. Chief Justice Marshall captured this reality in Marbury v. Madison when he declared that “a law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” That principle of voidness is not an assertion of judicial supremacy, but a reminder that no branch of government — not even the judiciary — is free to bend the constitutional order to its own preferences.
And this is not just historical reflection. The D.C. Court of Appeals, in Trump v. Thompson (2022), effectively recognized the same reality when it described how the constitutional system itself responds to crises. That decision reads less like a narrow ruling and more like a description of the HCF at work — acknowledging that the Constitution’s design contains within it the very pressures and pathways by which it protects itself.
A Lesson — and a Challenge — for Today
Remembering that our constitutional order began as an experiment should give us both humility and courage. Humility, because we are not the final word — our generation can still learn and correct. Courage, because the Founders themselves did not wait for perfect solutions before acting.
But reflection is not enough. The experiment is ongoing, and its survival depends on us. Each constitutional crisis — from Dobbs to Trump v. United States to the debates over presidential immunity — is a signal that the HCF is active, pressing us toward correction. These moments are not merely partisan battles. They are invitations to reassert constitutional fidelity.
The Great American Experiment is not ours to end. It is ours to honor — by learning, by teaching, and by acting to keep the system in balance.
