Develop a six page paper using the 15 articles below and explain and analyze how these articles relate to constitutionalism and procedural law. Describes contributions of research to the issues discussed and critically evaluate these contributions. Summarizes major points of the articles and suggest areas for future research. Adler, M. (2006). Popular constitutionalism and the rule of recognition: Whose practices ground U.S. law? Northwestern University Law Review, 100, 719-805. The question the authors are asking is whether “popular constitutionalism” is possible. The meaning they prescribe to “popular constitutionalism” is the inclusion of popular views or ideas in constitutional decision making. Popular constitutionalism gives deference on constitutional matters to citizens through voting and petitioning. This appears quite similar to that of “tyranny of the majority” and given the low number of registered voters in this country, not to mention the low percentage of registered voters that even participate by voting, one could say that it’s not a “tyranny of the majority”, but a tyranny of a majority (via minimal representation). Our system of justice has evolved over the years due to social changes, as Ronald Dworkin states, “Law is, at least in part, a social fact.” In other words, “law is a set of socially grounded norms”. The author work is a qualitative exploration of popular constitutionalism. Arato, A. (2005). Constitutional learning. Journal of Social & Political Theory, 4, 1-36. The aut hor examines recent constitutional attempts as a learning process. He highlights the constitutional attempts in Iraq by stating that the attempt was ill-fated in the top-down approach initiated by the United States. The Iraqis reminded the U.S. of Thomas Paine’s well known dictum that, “the constitution of a country is not the act of its government, but of the people constituting a government”. The author further states that the constitutional advisors in Iraq are not versed in comparative politics, nor in the politics of the geographical areas where they are advising. It is important to have a complete and competent legal system in which a tightly knitted normal procedure system is essential in every aspect of law, from the criminal law through the basic constitutional law. The author work is a qualitative exploration of constitutionalism. Barkow, R. (2006). Articles: Separation of powers and the criminal state. Stanford Law Review, 58, 989-1052. Bevir, M., Rhodes, R. A. W., & Weller, P. (2003). Comparative governance: Prospects and lessons. Public Administration, 81, 191-210. Bevir, M., Rhodes, R. A. W., & Weller, P. (2003). Traditions of governance: interpreting the changing role of the public sector. Public Administration, 81, 1-17. Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2004). Interpreting British Governance, Australian Journal of Political Science, 6, 129-164. Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2005). Interpretation and its others, Australian Journal of Political Science, 40, 169-187. Church, R. (2006). Answering the dispersed self and nation: A response to Jed Rubenfled’s freedom and time: A theory of constitutional self government. Journal of Law and Religion, 21, 349-383. Green, J. (2004). Participatory democracy: Movements, campaigns, and democratic living. Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 18, 60-71. Kramer, L. (2006). Generating constitutional meaning. California Law Review, 94, 1439-1453. Loughlin, M. (2007). Constitutional theory: A 25th anniversary essa y. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 25, 1-15. Parkinson, J. and Roche, D. (2004). Restorative justice: Deliberative democracy in action? Australian Journal of Political Science, 39, 505-518. Poole, T. (2007). Tilting at windmills? Truth and illusion in ‘The political Constitution’. The Modern Law Review, 70, 250-277. Post, R. (1998). Democracy, popular sovereignty, and judicial review. California Law Review, 86, 429-443. Sunstein, C. (2007). Incompletely theorized agreements in constitutional law. Social Research, 74, 1-24.