We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution

by Jill Lepore

The U.S. Constitution is among the oldest constitutions in the world--and one of the most difficult to amend. At what cost? In this landmark, lavishly illustrated book, Harvard professor of history and law Jill Lepore argues that the philosophy of amendment is foundational to American constitutionalism. Challenging both originalism and the Supreme Court's monopoly on constitutional interpretation, Lepore argues that the framers never intended for the Constitution to be kept, like a butterfly, under glass, but instead expected that future generations would be forever tinkering with it, improving the machinery of government. In an account as radical as Charles Beard's An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, Lepore offers a sweeping, lyrical, and democratic constitutional history, telling the stories of generations of Americans who have attempted everything from abolishing the Electoral College to guaranteeing environmental rights, hoping to mend America by amending its constitution.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, American History, Historical, Audiobook, Law

720 pages, Hardcover

First published September 16, 2025

About the author

Jill Lepore is the David Woods Kemper ’41 Professor of American History, Harvard College Professor, and chair of Harvard's History and Literature Program. She is also a staff writer at The New Yorker.

Winner of the Anisfield-Wolf Award for the best non-fiction book on race, and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize; The Name of War (Knopf, 1998), winner of the Bancroft Prize, the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize, and the Berkshire Prize and a finalist for the J. Anthony Lukas Award.

A co-founder of the magazine Common-place, Lepore’s essays and reviews have also appeared in the New York Times, the Times Literary Supplement, American Scholar, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, The Daily Beast, the Journal of American History and American Quarterly. Her research has been funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Pew Foundation, the Gilder Lehrman Institute, the Charles Warren Center, and the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. She has served as a consultant for the National Park Service and currently serves on the boards of the National Portrait Gallery and the Society of American Historians.
Jill lives in Cambridge,Massachusetts.

Reviews

[Caroline · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book took me a long time to read, not because it was too dense or badly written, but because I could only take so much of it at a time without becoming terribly depressed.

Lepore approaches the history of the Constitution from the point of view of attempts to amend it, starting with the Bill of Rights and ending up in 2024 with the current world in which nobody is willing to try to amend it anymore. This is both extremely enlightening, and just really sad. It will disabuse you of the notion (if you still hold it) that there every was any kind of liberal golden age where America really tried to do right by everyone.

Her thesis is that amending the Constitution is in fact a safety valve for society, which reduces the likelihood of the country exploding into civil war. At the same time, however, she demonstrates that just because an amendment happens (especially the 14th and 15th) doesn't mean it is enforced and carried out, if you have courts that are happy to ignore it, which we always have. In a way, this truth undermines her thesis, to my mind - if you have the Supreme Court making rulings like Plessy vs Ferguson then what does it matter that you have the 14th amendment? The ultimate situation is one where racism and hypocrisy rules every aspect of American life. And here we are.

Lepore tells of figures important in the history of amendment attempts who are forgotten today, including those who promulgated the toxic "originalism" that is so influential now, and she sums up the dishonesty of the originalists - history is important to them only when it supports their agenda, and they disregard it when it doesn't.

More interestingly, she continually points out how the US Constitution is backward and sclerotic compared to most other constitutions in the world, which have been rewritten, amended, and replaced many times to provide a better foundation for a healthy society.

One sad episode, concerning an amendment to abolish the electoral college, was surprising because it failed in part due to the unrelenting opposition of the NAACP who seemed to think it would dilute the voting power of the nonwhite electorate. It seems clear to me that the opposite is true.

I did find a few of her remarks on US political polarization to be a little dissonant to the overall book - for example, her opinion that in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the democratic party became a part of the tech elite and abandoned the middle class is both debatable and unrelated to her main topic.

If you can make your way through this important and informative book you will learn a lot, but you will conclude that the US has never lived up to its publicity, not for a minute.

Thanks to NetGalley for letting me read an advance copy of this book.

[Bruce Katz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Any new book by Jill Lepore is occasion for celebration. Her agile mind, command of history, felicity of expression, wit, and ability to make complicated topics understandable are evident in virtually everything she writes.

These gifts are abundant in her newest work, “We the People.” As the title suggests, the book is a companion piece to “These Truths,” published in 2918. That earlier work used the Declaration of Independence as a lens through which to an analyze American history (i.e., how far have we as a nation succeeded in realizing the “self-evident” truths and “inalienable rights” articulated in that foundational document).

“We the People” announces itself as a history of the Constitution. It covers an impressive amount of ground, including the debates over its composition, which particular ideas were problematic and to whom (Federalist/Antifederalist; North/South), how its many propositions have played out since it was ratified (interesting bit of trivia: future president James Monroe voted against ratification), what we (citizens, legislators, and courts) have made of it, and a good deal more.

Most particularly, “We the People” looks at the topic of amendments. The Framers may have debated whether what we now refer to as the Bill of Rights should be amendments to the Constitution or embedded in the text of the document itself, but there was general agreement that some mechanism had to be included on amending it. The Framers knew that if there were no regular formal way to amend the document so that it reflected changes in the country, the only alternative would be violence. Hence the inclusion of the Article 5.

"By far the most radical innovation of the U.S. Constitution, and of state constitutions," Lepore notes, "was the provision they made for their own repair and improvement by the people themselves, to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.”

As it happens, amending the Constitution has proved far more difficult than the Framers anticipated. State constitutions had mechanisms for amendment and have done so frequently. Likewise for other democratic countries around the world. But the United States, whose Constitution is older than modern democracy itself, has become incapable of amending its foundational users’ manual: “The Fifth Article was meant as a constitutional door open to the people,"Lepore writes. "After 1971, that door slammed shut.”

Lepore chronicles how this situation came to be. She covers: how the document was viewed and used in the early years of the Republic, the so-called Civil War amendments (“Like the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment was barely enforced. Efforts were made to repeal it, but by the 1880s, this was hardly necessary since white Southerners had found ways, far short of repeal, to nullify it; it became, in many parts of the country, a dead letter."), various efforts over the centuries to amend the Constitution to permit child labor and enshrine Christianity as the national religion, and of course debates over civil rights, equal rights, women’s rights, abortion rights, same-sex marriage rights, and on and on. In every case I learned something I hadn't known before.

Two key threads run through the book. The first is that, having lost the ability to amend the Constitution as laid out in Article 5, we have used the Supreme Court to do it for us with its decisions about what passes Constitutional muster and what doesn’t –- an infernal process, as we’ve seen in recent decades, where one era's assertion of Constitutionality can be capriciously overturned by a later Court.

The second thread concerns what has come to be known as Originalism. The United States is the only modern democracy where such a notion has taken root. In a sense, the impetus behind Originalism would not have shocked the Framers. Thomas Jefferson, for example, writing four decades after drafting the Declaration, anticipated that there would be men who “look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched.”

But Originalism went beyond this. “What was new about originalism as it emerged in the last decades of the twentieth century,” Lepore writes, “was its insistence that the only way to interpret the Constitution is to read it the way a probate judge reads a dead man’s last will and testament. James Madison is that dead man.” Worse, Lepore argues, Originalism is intellectually, historically, and morally dishonest because it is based on an inconsistent and often mistaken understanding of what the so-called Origin was. “For the Constitution of the United States to endure, if anything human can so long endure, it needs to bind Americans to one another by way of something other than an imaginary eighteenth century.” (Or as Lepore causticly writes in her discussion of the Bork confirmation hearings, Originalism demanded that Americans “think about [the Constitution] in a very particular ye-olde way.”)

More often than not, the Originalist reasoning in a particular debate was based more on "history" that led to particular outcomes than to actual history. The clearest example of this was the decision involving presidential immunity. At heart, Lepore says, Originalism is the very antithesis of amendment.

“Would judging law be reduced to the act of choosing between competing accounts of the past written by different groups of historians, based on some as-yet-undefined method of determining which account is the correct one? It didn’t work out that way. In a series of crucial cases, the Trump-era Court cited history if it supported a preferred outcome, and if history did not support that outcome, the Court simply ignored the past.”

I can’t begin to capture the breadth and depth of this book, not to mention its many pleasures and it relevance to our volatile time. Instead I will share some passages I found particularly noteworthy.

• “With only twenty-seven amendments, the U.S. Constitution has one of the lowest amendment rates in the world. But since 1789, Americans have submitted nearly ten thousand petitions and countless letters, postcards, and phone and email messages to Congress calling for or opposing constitutional amendments, and they have introduced and agitated for thousands more amendments in the pages of newspapers and pamphlets, from pulpits, at political rallies, on websites, and over social media. Some twelve thousand amendments have been formally introduced on the floor of Congress.”

• “Efforts to alter these arrangements at the federal level—which included proposed amendments not only abolishing the Electoral College but also reapportioning representation and requiring Supreme Court justices to retire at age sixty-five—all failed. In the states, these efforts nearly all succeeded.”

• “Before the 1920s, the Constitution itself—the sheepskin parchment marked with goose-quill ink—had never been seen by the public. The original document had in fact largely been forgotten and ignored and more than once all but misplaced.” I loved Lepore's description of the well-guarded parade of vehicles bearing the Constitution and Declaration past the Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, as the justices deliberated on Brown v. Board of Education, and how politicians from Southern states were outraged at the decision, claiming it was itself unConstitutional and that an amendment was needed to overturn it.

• In the late 1960s, Indiana Senator Birch Bayh led an effort to get rid of the Electoral College and replace it with a direct popular vote. He came ever so close: “By September 1970, the Bayh amendment had passed in the House, 339–70; it enjoyed overwhelming popular support, polling at more than 80 percent in favor; and it had the (faint-hearted) endorsement of the president, Richard Nixon, the AFL-CIO, the American Bar Association, the League of Women Voters, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.” (Interestingly, one of the biggest initial obstacles to the amendment was opposition from the NAACP. Later, unsurprisingly, insurmountable opposition from Southern states led to its demise.)

• “More than three in four Americans supported a school prayer amendment. And members of Congress had also been flooded with mail from constituents, nearly all of it supporting a school prayer amendment; the quantity of congressional mail broke all records. But most churches and the National Council of Churches opposed an amendment.”

• “Two and a half centuries after the American Revolution began, Americans appeared to have altogether abandoned the philosophy of amendment. And the president seemed to have abandoned constitutionalism itself. Asked in 2025 whether he had a duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution, Trump said, ‘I don’t know.’ "

[Caitie · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5 stars. I realize this is an unpopular opinion.

While this is a fascinating and important book (and very timely unfortunately), I found it also to be too dense for me at times. Every tiny detail is added to this book and made it read very slowly and, at least for me, made the importance hard to find. When books are this dense, I sometimes wonder if I am too stupid to grasp what the author is trying to do. However, I have read books from Jill Lepore before....but this felt so much denser.

Of course, the constitution should be a living document, but in recent years it seems like it’s been undermined and ignored. I found the early chapters to be the most interesting….especially the discussion of how women and people of color were viewed.

[Jill Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

With her unique ability to blend highly detailed history with compelling narrative, Jill Lepore has yet again crafted a fascinating and enlightening book that educates and entertains in equal measure. I am a lawyer by training, so much of the factual bases behind the development and implementation of the Constitutional conventions and technical amendment process were familiar to me - although she dug deeper in a number of areas than I recalled ever doing in law school. Where I found the book most compelling was in the examples of personal involvement of those either directly responsible for the drafting or consideration of the various amendments (adopted and discarded) over time. Pairing this with her marvelous skill at peeking behind the curtain of political and judicial machinations, and presentations of thought-provoking challenges to conventional wisdom (or lack thereof), produces a whole that is so much more than the sum of its parts.

It's a dense book, as all of her works are. That's not to say that it is at all inaccessible, even without a law degree or background in American judicial and political history, but to point out that it is thoughtful and requires a thoughtful reading - and that isn't a speedy process, even for a fast reader. I personally agree with her central premise - that the Constitution was intended to be reviewed and revised as necessary - and found her perspective and supporting evidence persuasive. We live in an era of bizarre political manipulations, which extend into the judicial and interpretive realms with startling frequency. Knowing the history and reminding people of the stated intentions of the oft-cited-as-though-they-were-omniscient Framers is, I think, essential to ensuring a sensible and rational way forward - a path that seems all too lightly trodden these days...

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for my obligation-free review copy.

[Sonny · Rating 5 out of 5]

― “By far the most radical innovation of the U.S. Constitution, and of state constitutions, was the provision they made for their own repair and improvement by the people themselves, to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.
This method for improvement is called amendment. In English, the verb amend goes back to the twelfth century, when it meant to correct a fault; to repair an omission, to fix what’s broken; or to improve in a moral sense: to make something better. The word shares a root, four of its five letters , and almost the entirety of its meaning, with the verb mend.”
― Jill Lepore, We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution

The U.S. Constitution resulted from clashes between the federalists and anti-federalists over the Articles of Confederation. Despite their differences, the two sides agreed on fundamental principles that influence how we interpret the Constitution today. Whether it’s abortion, immigration, or gun violence, debates about the meaning of the Constitution are a constant of American life. Amid the country’s deep political polarization, the 25th amendment that addresses Presidential vacancy, disability and removal from office has become a frequent topic of discussion, especially after the January 6th insurrection and the election of two septuagenarians who would become octogenarians while in office.

With We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution, Harvard history professor Jill Lepore (These Truths), has provided a highly readable history of the Constitution, as well as a useful guide to understand the several controversies surrounding the Constitution.

A key focus of Lepore’s history is the difficulty in amending the Constitution. While the framers included Article V to “revise, reform, correct, update, and improve the Constitution,” it has proven “infinitely more difficult” to amend the Constitution than the founders intended.

― “At the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787, Virginia delegate George Mason, pointing out that everyone knew the Constitution was imperfect, argued that ‘amendments therefore will be necessary, and it will be better to provide for them, in an easy, regular and constitutional way than to trust to chance and violence.’”
― Jill Lepore, We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution

Lepore points out that almost all efforts to amend the Constitution fail, and success often takes decades. For long stretches of American history, amending the Constitution has been effectively impossible. In describing the sometimes difficult path for some amendments, Lepore reviews the 13th amendment that abolished slavery, and 19th amendment that established women’s suffrage. These are but two among the many proposed amendments that never saw ratification. But then the founders never anticipated the rise of political parties or polarized politics. Despite broad public support, at least two amendments have failed to pass: the Equal Rights Amendment and an amendment to end the Electoral College. Since the Constitution was written, thousands of proposed amendments have failed.

Lepore concludes her book with a focus on the radical legal philosophy of originalism, the theory of interpreting legal texts holding that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted as it was understood at the time of its adoption. She examines how the Supreme Court moved from the activist philosophy of Chief Justice Earl Warren in the 1950s and 1960s to the doctrine of originalism espoused by associate justice Antonin Scalia. Lepore clearly believes that originalism has undermined the process of constitutional evolution. After all, the Constitution was written for white men; it disenfranchised women, free blacks, slaves and Native Americans.

The amendments to the Constitution have tended to come in waves. The first twelve Amendments, including the Bill of Rights, were added by 1804. Then there were no amendments for more than half a century. In the wake of the Civil War, three important Amendments were added between 1865 and 1870: the 13th (outlawing slavery), the 14th (mainly protecting equal civil rights), and the 15th (forbidding racial discrimination in voting). After the Civil War Amendments, another forty-three years passed until the Constitution was amended again. Four more Amendments (16th through 19th) were added between 1913 and 1920. Seven more amendments were adopted at pretty regular intervals between 1920 and 1971, but except for one unusual amendment (27th), there have been no amendments to the Constitution since 1971. Today, both progressives and conservatives are seeking change through the courts rather than through amending the Constitution.

As the United States approaches the 250th anniversary of the nation (2026) and the 250th anniversary of the Constitution (2037), We the People provides readers with a history of the Constitution that is needed at a time when constitutional change becomes more difficult. Lepore aims to look at the history of the Constitution through a wide lens. Hopefully, it is a work that will lead to a public discussion that is good for democracy.

[Oleksandr Zholud · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a non-fiction book about the US Constitution, amendments to it, and how this document was read back then and today. The Constitution, adopted in 1787, is viewed by a lot of people almost like a holy writ, which others emulate and which is so genially written that it kept the balance of powers for over two centuries. At the same time, it turns out that one of the Founding Fathers, Jefferson wrote to Madison in 1789 that “no society can make a perpetual constitution,” because “the earth belongs always to the living generation” and that therefore the United States ought to hold a new constitutional convention every nineteen years, once every generation. Moreover, the current approach of constitutional interpretation is known as originalism. The word originalism did not enter the English language until 1980, and it had virtually no currency before 1987. It means that the only way to interpret the Constitution is to read it the way a probate judge reads a dead man’s last will and testament, i.e., using only information that remained from that man (letters, interviews, etc.) and only related to the question at hand. Therefore, for example, while president Washington’s letters are of importance but there should be no interest in letters written to Washington, by his wife Martha (where she insisted than women should have rights too), say, or by a dirt-poor Virginia farmer or a carpenter’s apprentice in Richmond, or by a Chippewa woman in western Pennsylvania, or by any of the more than three hundred people held in human bondage at the Washingtons’ plantation in Virginia. So, this isn’t taking history into account, but merely nitpicking from a small sample of (sometimes contradictory) works.

To amend it to make it better. With only twenty-seven amendments, the U.S. Constitution has one of the lowest amendment rates in the world. Moreover, the largest number of amendments were passed by Congress in 1789, in the aftermath of the Revolutionary War. These twelve amendments, ten of which, later known as the Bill of Rights, were ratified by the states by 1791. No amendments were ratified in the sixty-one years between 1804 and 1865, and then, at the end of the Civil War, three in five years.

However, since 1789, Americans have submitted nearly 10’000 petitions and countless letters, postcards, and phone and email messages to Congress calling for or opposing constitutional amendments, and they have introduced and agitated for thousands more amendments in the pages of newspapers and pamphlets, from pulpits, at political rallies, on websites, and over social media. Some 12’000 amendments have been formally introduced on the floor of Congress. Only 33 of them have been approved to date.

It can be thought that questions of women’s rights, equality of people disregarding race and color, slavery – all of them weren’t included because the founders hadn’t thought about them. It isn’t true. Say the slavery was held out of the constitution because already at that time it was the question that would have stopped either southern slaveowners or northern abolitionists from supporting the constitution. Or equal rights for women – I guess we all know the cry ‘no taxation without representation’, but back in the 18th century, there were people stating: women with property of their own, who were either widows or unmarried, had no representation and, without it, ought not to be obligated to pay taxes.

Sometimes supporters of a purposefully vague text voiced what seemed obvious to them but not for us: The Constitution lacked a bill of rights. So what? It also didn’t guarantee a man the right to shave his beard or explain how “to take the measure of a man’s breeches” or specify that the president of the United States “shall be of the male gender.” Were these omissions really problems? “What shall we think if, in the progress of time, we should come to have an old woman at the head of our affairs? What security have we that he shall be a white man? What would be the national disgrace if . . . a vile negro should come to rule over us?”

There is a lot on amendments from abolishing slavery to a right to bear arms and how the attitudes changed over the years. The USA needs a new constitution!

[Colleen Browne · Rating 5 out of 5]

If I could award 10 stars for this book, I would do it. Granted, it is one of those tomes that many people avoid, but it is worth every page. It is a history of the Constitution and its many trials and tribulations. From the perspective of an extremely capable and well-educated historian, the reader learns a great deal. The book covers every aspect from the Constitutional Convention to its date of publication in early 2025. Moreover, Lepore has promised a re-issue of a previous book, 'These Truths....' to include a section on Trump and the Constitution, which promises to expose his infringement of the law as well as the Constitution.

Section V of the Constitution outlines the process for amending it, making it easier to change, which, as she proves, has been exasperatingly difficult to do. The book demonstrates how attempts to get rid of or at least reform the electoral college has been at the forefront of debate since the early days of the Republic. This has had popular support from the public at large each time it is put before Congress. Sadly, the change has not taken place. It was included for the benefit of the slave states in Philadelphia and is opposed for basically the same reason presently. That is, states with smaller populations fear losing the greater influence it affords them.

In each section, the reader is provided with the list of would-be amendments Congress has considered. It is amazing how many attempts have been made to make what seems to be reasonable, such as attempts to make the senatorial representation dependent on the population of each state, the ERA, a child protection amendment, and many more. This book provides research-based analysis on every issue and discusses changes on how decisions are taken.

The idea that Antonin Scalia introduced to the Court of so-called originalism, in which it is argued that decisions must be based on the thinking of the framers or their words. One can see clearly, that it is based on smoke and mirrors and that it is not possible anyway since the framers could never have envisaged the changes and inventions that have occurred. However intelligent they may have been, they could never have dreamed about the internet, just one of the differences cited.

I highly recommend this book even for those like myself who have read many books on the subject but none as complete and well researched as this one.

[Xavier Patiño]

I listened to We the People in hopes of gaining a better understanding of the U.S. Constitution and its ideas. It’s a necessity given the current political crisis in America, where every day the document gets trampled by the current administration.

Lepore’s coverage is expansive, from the documents’ inception up until the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Constitutional amendment is the book’s running theme. The founders wished to find a middle ground here, making it difficult but not impossible to make alterations. Throughout history, many court cases requesting an amendment have made their way to the Supreme Court, and here are where the challenges begin.

Every Justice follows his or her own constitutional philosophy when interpreting the law -- Originalism, Textualism, Original Intent, just to name a few. I found some of these systems confusing. How are we to understand what the founders thought of abortion? Or civil rights? Women’s rights? The words in the preamble “We the People” must also be scrutinized – define “people.” White people? Native Americans? Others not born in the U.S?

This realization brought to light how difficult it can be to pass any kind of amendment if our judicial system relies on elucidating on a 250-year-old document written by men long dead. Men who owned other people and thought the female race unequal.

Although I found the work dense and sometimes difficult to follow, I finished with a surface-level understanding. This was no fault of the author but trying to listen to a complex subject while driving isn’t easy for me unfortunately. But rest assured, Lepore is an excellent and knowledgeable author, and I can’t recommend this work enough.

[Dawn Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

I need to emphasize that this is a very important book. Knowing the history of one of the most important documents ever is extremely important, especially now, so this book really is a much needed and timely read.

That said,, some of this book, FOR ME [I need to note that I am a history lover/reader and always strive to learn more, absorb more, and often read things that are just a touch beyond me because how can we grow and continue to learn without that stretching of the mind?], was...well, above my pay-grade, and I struggled. Some of the book [again, FOR ME] was also very dull [there are quite a few side-story ventures that confused me more than they enhanced my reading/understanding of the book], and several times I found myself checking out, and then having to go back and re-listen to what I missed [due to the eBook ARC having NO useable table of contents, I also struggled when needing to look things up, or to catch up when I had zoned out and was beyond frustrated at this] and that was also very frustrating at times.

However, I DID learn a lot [some I knew, most I did not, much was frustrating because apparently we have NOT learned from the Founders mistakes and I spent a lot of time rolling my eyes, groaning out loud and surprisingly, in tears], and ultimately I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to read the fascinating history of this amazing document.

Thank you to NetGalley, Jill Lepore, and W. W. Norton & Company/Liveright for providing this ARC in exchange for an honest review.

[Claudia]

Walking through Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), with all four of my really grand grandchildren, during the summer of 2025, my eye caught a lecture to be presented by Jill Lepore to promote her book: "We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution". I made a note to attend; but when I called for tickets, I was informed that the event was a student-only event. Fortunately, Ms. Lepore was scheduled also at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Music Hall on the same date. This lecture was an emotional exploration of the history of myriad efforts to amend the Constitution.

In 1971, the Twenty-sixth Amendment, which lowered the national voting age from 21 to 18, was ratified to permit the right to vote to those "old enough to fight". My eldest brother, then still serving in Vietnam, had not been able to vote when drafted from Penn State at age 20. Finally countless others like him, drafted but denied the right to participate in the elections that sent them to war, could vote.

In her book, Jill Lepore stresses the idea of "the philosophy of amendment", the capacity to mend our ways without violence. She sees the original Constitution, consisting of 4,400 words, as an evolving blueprint of ideas scrolled out over two centuries. As a nation, she urges us to continue to debate, accumulate interpretations, and propose amendments as we continue to evolve in ways not foreseen back in the day.

[Marks54 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book. Jill Lepore is a distinguished and prolific historian who has written a new history of the U.S. Constitution. She tells a detailed story that starts with efforts to amend the Articles of Confederation and extends up to the present and the coming of the second Trump administration. I cannot begin to summarize this long book that is in part a political and social history of the US along with a history of the Constitution. But I can offer some observations.

To start with, Lepore is a disciplined historian who tells her stories clearly and effectively. This is not a legal analysis, although it provides a good start for anyone seeking a legal approach. There is a lot of material being presented here and I suspect that most readers will learn something new from this deep dive into Constitutional history.

In terms of how she focuses her story, Lepore takes the perspective of amendment or more generally how the US Constitution has changed over the course of its life. Now change in her story goes beyond the formal amendment process embodied in Article V. (BTW - be sure to have a copy of the Constitution handy.) Constitutional change can occur through Amendment, judicial interpretations, the passing of new legislation, the holding of constitutional conventions, or even through the persistent interpretation of some constitutional elements one way rather than another. Perhaps the most impressive dimension of the book is how Lepore traces the interactions of these different types of change over the course of the history. At some points, some types of changes predominate, while at others they become infeasible. At other times there might be multiple approaches to change, along with the noting of strange bedfellows - different and clashing partisan interests that may support (or oppose) changes at a given time.

Keeping track of the people highlighted in the book is a challenge. Even more challenging for me was keeping track of all of the legal cases that we mentioned. In additional to all of this, Professor Lepore notes a large number of attempts at changing the Constitution, such as through new amendments. The vast majority of these change efforts failed and the impossibility of amendment is clearly noted as a major problem at key points in the narrative. (Not all points, however. The role of Birch Bayh in amending the Constitution more recently is a story I was unfamiliar with and found fascinating.)

The overall tone of the story is not entirely positive and real change seems daunting. However, Lepore closes the story by noting how the US Constitution has lasted for a very long time, but has outlasted many if not most of the other constitutions in the world that were modelled on it. It appears that the life of a major government constitution is a difficult one - one that does not age well. Given that, the limitations apparent in Professor Lenore’s history are placed in context and are easier to appreciate even while working for change.

This is a superb book and well worth working through, especially in the current political environment.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a must read book. This is packed with so much good information about the Constitution and the amendement process. This is definitely one I will continue revisiting because I will probably need that many times to internalize all this information.

[Joseph Montuori · Rating 4 out of 5]

We the People is a long (and I mean LONG!) history of the U.S. Constitution from its writing to 2024. Lepore’s sweeping work is written from the perspective of amending it: the 12,000 amendments that have been proposed, and the individuals and groups (the formerly enslaved, women, Native Americans, right, left, etc.) who proposed or supported amendments. We the people. That’s a brilliant approach to a topic that is so central to U.S. history. (Don’t fret, there’s plenty of judicial interpretations from SCOTUS too. It’s just that this is an epic story with a big cast.)

That raises another positive attribute: Lepore’s storytelling. Spoiler alert: constitutional history can be dry and tedious. Fortunately, Lepore’s incredible research and lively writing style brought many stories to life, avoiding an overly academic tone. Despite this, I did find it difficult to finish the 700+ pages. In fact, at 1/3 of the way through, I had to return my library copy, bought the audio and listened to the rest (~ 12 hours). That helped, but I personally would have preferred a shorter work.

Another plus: despite my background in teaching U.S. history and government, I learned so much more than I expected. For example, the nearly countless attempts to amend the federal constitution; the post-revolutionary era history of state constitutional revision and conventions; and Native American efforts to amend their way into sovereignty and their own fascinating constitution writing.

Overall, Lepore’s unique historical perspective — that of “we the people,” writ large — made this a rewarding effort. Especially in this era, it’s important to remember that a polarized United States is not unique or new. History echoes. We’ve never been here before, but we’ve most certainly been divided, angered, and violent. And at other times we’ve managed to expand greater justice to a wider swath of society (alas, not this book’s topic!) And when that isn’t happening, history also reminds us that this too shall pass.

[Tina Panik · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reviewed for Library Journal; full review appears there.

[Ashley Denktas · Rating 5 out of 5]

I genuinely enjoyed this book way more than I was expecting. I read it via audiobook and the author did a great job reading in a way that kept me engaged despite what I was afraid would dift into a textbook rendition of history. However, this goes way beyond the textbooks and what is taught in American schools, which makes sense as this is being written by someone with a PHD in history/ a reporter. Lepore does a wonderful job making a huge span of history approachable for the layman person, arguing her point about the amendablity of the constitution, and its impact on the world and how we live in it. Additionally, I enjoyed learning way more about how different groups, African Americans, Women, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, engaged with the constitution throughout history. In school, these stories honestly felt like they were a paragraph in a textbook unit - and seeing the whole story and its evolution was wonderful. Honestly, I am ashamed I didn't know several things in this book.

Lepore goes in depth describing how the constitution was written and the particular phrasing that was debated - which would have a profound impact on the world. These debates were not just of the founding fathers - but with whole towns and locales being completely engaged. Men with property were who turned out to be what encompassed "we the people" but during the 1780s was a time of political debate where everyone was involved. It was also interesting to see the evolution of the arguement on who was included in "we the people" throughout the nation's history. Honestly up until the 1920s, American society seemed brimming with constant discussions about how our government worked and seemed to have way more highly engaged citizens.

I honestly want to reread this book in physical format to highlight and really take notes since there was so much information to take in, and I don't think that I can completely internalize it on the first read. It did energize me and make me realize that we the people do need to be active participants in our government. However, in American society it seems so taboo to talk about politics or how to be engaged - I hope that we reignite an "American" way to debate and discuss governance. Our constitution was a series of compromises (albeit some REALY BAD ONES) and until modern times, many elements of our law were also until the rise of major party partisanship.

Lepore showcases how the Constitution is extremely hard to change/ amend despite Article 5 outlining a process. This lack of ability to change has produced conflict and ultimately forced people, congress, the courts to pursue change through other branches of government which allows decisions to be overturned or read differently pending who is on the Supreme Court. I think every American should read this book, as it really shows us how we got to our current political climate. Our founding fathers even thought the constitution was too hard to amend, but ended up moving forward with the Constituion after months at the constitutional convention.

I took several notes on my phone during this book, but some highlights are:
1. America needs to figure out a way to allow the constitution to change with time - as our founders could not have anticipated the problems we have now. That is why in my opinion originalism cannot be how we interpret the constitution - we need to write down how we approach new situations. It was a requirement that the first state constitutions be written down, therefore we need to allow amendment and write down new changes. Do I know how? No.
2. Both parties seem to use systems to their advantage when they have majority which allows for huge swings. This is very clearly seen in history - but it was interesting seeing the accounts of specific issues explored by Lepore. Additionally, Maddison edited his notes about the constitutional convention for YEARS leading up to their release - changing them to fit his opinions how how elements should be interpreted. These now also impact how laws and rulings are made to this day since judges may use that to help figure out how they interpret the constitution.
3. The electoral college has been debated for so long, yet we have not figured out a way on how to approach it. Several elections now have shown this is something that lawmakers need to address. Do I know how to approach this as well? No. Popular vote is something I personally would like, but I do see how it would allow another divide that already exists (urban/rural) to further be exacerbated in American society. However, as seen in the book there are times in American history where the minority seems to have more sway than the majority.
4. I didn't realize Regan also used the slogan Make America Great Again and how his presidency also had huge effects on the world and even individual elements of my life. (My American history class didn't really fully go in depth post 1920s which again I am ashamed to say I didn't really go and investigate further myself.).

I think every American should read this book. It made me honestly quite scared for the future, but also made me want to engage with our government as fellow Americans did during the nation's founding. (Side note I loved listening to the audiobook before bed because the author had a really good reading voice, it was informative, and after about 30 mins it would help me fall to sleep. This is not to say the book was boring! I usually listen to books before bed, and as someone with insomnia - it was a double boon for my education and sleep).

[Laura Hoffman Brauman · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The Constitution is ink on parchment. It is forty-four hundred words. And it is, too, the accrued set of meanings that have been made of those words, the amendments, the failed amendments, the struggles, the debates—the course of events—over more than two centuries. It is not easy, but it is everyone’s."
In We the People, Leppre looks at the history of constitutions, primarily the US one, but also including some references and examinations of them from various state and sovereign nations, including those of Indigenous nations. The context of the work is looking at the document as a living entity - something that was established with a clear understanding that it wasn't perfect and would need to evolve over time -- hence a strategy of amending it was built into the framework. This is a dense but readable work. The first half was a little slower going for me as it focused on the amendments that both passed and failed through the late 1800's. The second half dove deeply into more recent political history and having personal context to many of the issues discussed made the reading really thought provoking. I also appreciated that she explored both ways the constitution evolves - through amendment and judicial review. I think I would need a second pass through this one to really have a more thorough understanding of all the concepts. A side note about reading this -- it is one of those reads that gives you really interesting historical context to contemporary issues, most notably for me the impact of polarization. This was an excellent read to kick off #NonfictionNovember.

[Laura Newton · Rating 5 out of 5]

This one took me awhile to read: not only was it lengthy, but filled with information that took me time to digest.
Her main premise centers on the constitution and its creation, amending process, and impact on the nation over its history. She delves into influential figures and movements, key battles that have impacted the nation, and spends time adding insights into the constitutions of states and territories of the US.
I found it fascinating to read this now as our country faces such polarization and strife, especially in our court system and reading of the law. Words like “original intent,” take on new meaning when it seems that even the framers weren’t sure what was relevant and necessary and could agree on little.

And the politicians who now use the constitution as a weapon rather than for its original purpose, freedom , a guide, a compass for leaders, would do well to read this book and learn a few things from the road this document has traveled since its inception.

[Daniel Mala · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jill Lepore is showing herself to be one of the all time best American historians. I enjoy reading history on a variety of subjects and from a variety of perspectives. On balance, reading These Truths was one of the better in depth tellings of American history. Sort of less of the Red, White and Blue version and more of the good, the bad and the ugly version. I tend to appreciate authors that have an agenda in telling a story that has on objective of making something either more or less than what it really is. We the People is a great telling of what was really taking place in the founding of this country and the writing of the constitution and in its amendments. There are so many aspects including that prior to the American Constitution, constitutions generally were not written documents. Since this new idea of the written constitution was taking hold, states were writing and rewriting constitutions. And there were even competing constitutions being written outside of Philadelphia. Anyway, she goes into great detail about the competing interests as well as the compromises that lead to some constitutional features that are hard to square to this day. Great book for anyone interested in the formation of the constitution or has any preconceived notions about what the founders may or may not of thought. Cheers!

[Chris P · Rating 5 out of 5]

A truly amazing book. If human beings are defined by their failures as much as their successes, then so too, should be the constitution. This book doesn’t so much as look at the content of the constitution, but in how the sausage was made. Looking at the effort and intent of successful and failed constitutional amendments we can truly get an idea of how our government was formed. I don’t think anyone can claim to understand the constitution without having read a book like this. I cannot recommend this book enough.

[Jim Gise · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the most part, a very interesting deep dive into its subject, highlighting some lesser known events and people (e.g., the attack on the U.S. Capitol in 1954 by four Puerto Rican nationalists, and Birch Bayh) that had an impact on the constitution. Disappointed that the term limits on Congress movements (from the 1990s and the current one) did not get any attention. And why does every nonfiction book I read have to whine about climate change in the last chapter?

[Mike Steinharter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jill Lepore is a tremendous historian and brilliant writer. This history of the US constitution covers a wide range of characters and the impacts on everything from slavery to women’s rights to native Americans, abortion and guns. It gets a little technical/wonky at times but stay with her it’s worth it. (Audible, read by the author)

[Chad Manske · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jill Lepore’s “We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution” delivers a sweeping, engrossing account of America’s evolving foundational document—just in time for the country’s 250th anniversary. Lepore, a Harvard historian renowned for “These Truths,” approaches the Constitution not as a static artifact, but as a living record, forever shaped by the restless ambitions of ordinary citizens as much as by the political elite. The result is both a work of urgent civic relevance and a masterclass in historical storytelling. The central thesis of Lepore’s book is that the process of amending the Constitution—intended as a mechanism for peaceful change—has grown so glacial and rare that it now threatens the nation’s political adaptability. Only 27 amendments have passed since 1789, despite nearly 12,000 attempts, and none since 1971. Lepore documents not just the amendments that succeeded, but the thousands that failed, offering stories of everyday Americans who dared to tinker with the machinery of government. Through archival deep-dives and colorful digressions (including unexpected forays into American Indian constitutions and the constitutional history of Hawai’i), she widens the lens beyond the usual narratives framed by legal scholars and originalist judges. What makes the book feel strikingly current is Lepore’s seamless integration of contemporary episodes—right up through the 2024 election—showing how constitutional disputes remain at the heart of national debate. Lavishly illustrated and rich in primary sources, the book is as enjoyable to read as it is enlightening. Lepore’s prose is sharp and clear, never dry, and brims with the urgency of a historian who believes that civic knowledge is both fragile and essential. “We the People” ultimately argues for a renewed culture of amending and reimagining the Constitution—a radical idea, yet one rooted in the founders’ original intentions. The book stands as a timely call for Americans to reclaim ownership over their most important civic inheritance.

[Jason Bednar · Rating 5 out of 5]

This deep dive into the history of the US Constitution shows exactly why it has to be a living document open to amendment and/or change. Scalia was an opportunist but not the first one. Politicians are generally not the best people to care for our people and the world.

[Al Lock · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent history that focuses on the amendment concept and process in American history. Highly recommended, especially if read in conjunction with The Summer of 1787 by David Stewart. The only point that I found amusing was the misunderstanding of what militia are.

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow this was really an all encompassing review of the US Constitution. How it was formed and how what it is today was never a forgone conclusion. I appreciated the explanation of Article V and how important and underutilized it has been. This book is definitely for Constitutional Law nerds and at times dense, but in my opinion well worth the read. Just make sure you have the time!

[M · Rating 4 out of 5]

We decided if the constitution is good or bad.

[Lance · Rating 4 out of 5]

The definitive book on the US Constitution. Starts off incredibly and a bit unnecessarily detailed, but I found the groove about 150 pages in. A fascinating subject and a great read.

[Kelsey Baguinat · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5🌟

[Katy H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must-read for every American.

[Dale · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very detailed look at the US constitution asking the question is it a living document subject to change in the form of amendments and the role of the Supreme Court in this discussion.