Constitutional Futurism as Pedagogy

Constitutional Law has transformed from a course on history to a discussion of current events. Cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reveal that the study of constitutional law is not a static, or even linear, discussion of constitutional text and history. Law is a shifting, changing enterprise that reflects social constructions of power, authority, and identity. How do we teach, learn, and understand constitutional law that is so laden with history, riddled with theories of consistency and adherence to precedent, but ultimately subject to upheaval?

In this Article, I suggest that Afrofuturism opens a portal to teaching and learning constitutional law that understands that past, pre-sent, and futures are interlinked, and our role as teachers and learners is to engage in critical thinking, imagination, and empathy. Building on Bennett Capers’s Afrofuturism and constitutional futurism, this Article considers how we might apply principles of Sankofa, change, and positionality to legal pedagogy. Each decision of the Supreme Court presents an oppor-tunity to interrogate how we think, learn, and understand individuals, so-ciety, and relationships of power that tie it all together. Constitutional fu-turism as a pedagogy forces us to think beyond the limitations of conven-tional constitutional thinking—to teach students to think outside the box we must first define its boundaries and purpose.

This Article therefore uses Students for Fair Admissions as a starting point for considering the assumptions, frameworks, and possibilities created by decisions of the Supreme Court, suggesting how we can learn and imagine from decisions that undermine visions of equity and justice.