Political entrenchment operates through informal and coercive means, not only formal legal rules

Evidence

Impediments to political change can take a number of different forms. Public lawyers tend to focus on formal, procedural barriers to change, such as the Article V requirements of dual supermajorities for constitutional amendment or a hypothetical statute that deems itself unrepealable. … As we shall emphasize, however, manipulating formal rules is not the only way to prevent change. After all, dictators can imprison or shoot their opponents rather than disfranchise them. Less dramatically, parties, politicians, and policies can create political, rather than legal, impediments to change. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 48

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to the reader’s project on why some ideologies become durable once embedded — this is the formal-vs-functional entrenchment distinction. — connects to: Political entrenchment means making political change more difficult than it otherwise would be — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 47; Blocking formal entrenchment hydraulically increases functional substitutes — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 431; Political actors route around legal bans through substitute channels, not direct violation. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 530 (+10 more)

Broader Connections

• Functional political entrenchment works without changing formal legal rules #corroborates (0.95) — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 173
• Entrenchment can serve public ends like precommitment and stability, not just self-serving power #expands (0.72)
• Powerful groups dominate space through legal and illegal means #corroborates (0.72) — David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, 1396