Conclusion

The case studies detailed above show that from a debate in 1800 that posited the founding as radically present, through the states versus people debates of 1819, and finally in the ‘Compact' of the early 1830s, the founding and the founders were regularly reconfigured within the lifetimes of the founders.

And Then They Begin to Look after the History of Their Founders’ 111 such reconfigurations. But perhaps these examples suggest we should be willing to engage the American founding in more demanding and reflexive ways than contemporary constitutional debates allow for. They direct us to move away from founding moments as definitive authorities and instead consider constitutional orders in their entirety as requiring explanation and analysis. Rather than begin­ning with foundings as an explanation for the present or seeking to locate authority for the present in the founding moment, the ability to reconfigure foundings urges an engagement with constitutional orders as ongoing projects. Moreover, it suggests that we look to the moments in which those projects break down and are subject to renewal as worthy of as much reflection and consideration as those of founding. Indeed, it might be that endings are as significant as foundings.