Publius in Our Time: The Federalist Papers in our Contemporary Constitutional Moment

The question that still haunts the Republic

“[W]hether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”

With those words, Alexander Hamilton opened Federalist No. 1 and posed one of the most ambitious political questions ever asked in one of the most significant contributions to political theories by American thinkers.

The Federalist Papers were written in a burst of urgency in 1787–1788 solely to persuade New Yorkers to ratify the Constitution. Yet the essays of Publius—Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay—have long outlived that immediate purpose. They have shaped constitutional interpretation, guided nation-builders around the world, and continue to appear in Supreme Court opinions deciding the most consequential disputes of our time. Two hundred and fifty years later, as we celebrate the anniversary of the nation’s Founding, a question arises: Were the Federalists right? Did the Constitution’s structure succeed in limiting power? Have the institutions of federalism, separation of powers, and factional competition worked as intended? Or have the Anti-Federalists’ warnings about consolidated power and distant government proven more prophetic?

Today’s debates over executive authority, the separation of powers, national polarization, and the role of the courts all trace back to the arguments first made in the Federalist Papers.

We invite scholars from a diverse array of disciplines to submit paper proposals about the relevance, accuracy, and influence of the Federalist Papers in our current constitutional climate. Those who think Publius proven right should argue so; those who think the ideas could’ve been improved should similarly make the argument. The Federalist Papers cover a lot of intellectual territory, so the possible paper topics are legion. Here are just a few suggested topics that authors might consider addressing:

• Publius repeatedly argued that liberty depends less on declarations of rights and more on structural limits on power. How well has the separation of powers functioned as a protection for individual liberty in modern governance?
• Publius defended an independent judiciary as essential to preserving constitutional boundaries. Has the judiciary fulfilled that role, particularly in policing the limits of government authority?
• Few constitutional designers outside the United States have followed the federal system advocated by Publius. Why might this be?
• Publius and the anti-federalists famously disagreed about the need for a bill of rights, which Publius thought to be unnecessary and even dangerous. How does Publius’ insight illuminate modern debates about the role of the Ninth Amendment and enumerated rights?
• What do the Civil War and subsequent Reconstruction reveal about Publius’ assumptions regarding the relationship between the states, and between states and the national government?
• Do technological advancements that have reduced the significance of geographic and jurisdictional divides between the states suggest a reassessment of Publius’ assumptions about a federalist structure?
• Recent Supreme Court decisions have revived interest in structural limits on government power. To what extent do these developments reflect a return to the constitutional vision articulated by Publius?
• Publius envisioned a system in which factions would compete with each other and thereby prevent any single faction from amassing too much power. Have the rise and influence of massive entities like multinational corporations, news conglomerates, and social media platforms undermined his argument, or do his insights remain relevant?

Paper Proposal Submission

Please submit a proposal (250–500 words) that clearly states your thesis, methodology, and contribution to the symposium theme. Proposals should be emailed to Ethan Blevins at .

Submission Deadline: May 15, 2026.
Proposals will be reviewed on a rolling basis, and early submission is strongly encouraged.

Topics and Scope

We encourage submissions from scholars working in multiple disciplines, including:

• Constitutional law
• Political theory
• American founding history
• Administrative law
• Originalism and original public meaning
• Economics
• Comparative constitutional design