State-admission policy is a durable entrenchment tool that can lock in policy status quos.

Evidence

In a federal system, the admission of new states can shift the balance of national power in the direction favored by the representatives of the newly admitted state. Consequently, current legislative majorities can cement their hold on power by selectively admitting, or not admitting, new states. As we will show, this dynamic, just like gerrymandering, can be bipartisan or partisan. In the bipartisan form, legislatures lock in a policy status quo by designing state admissions policy in a way that maintains the current balance of partisan power. In the partisan form, a dominant party advances its own policy agenda and insulates that agenda against subsequent change by manipulating the admissions policy. — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 288

Categorization

• XREF: Directly parallels the reader’s core question: what makes an entrenchment mechanism durable vs. disposable. Here the distinction is bipartisan (self-reinforcing status quo lock-in by both parties) vs. partisan (one party insulating its agenda). — connects to: State admission policy can entrench policy by selectively admitting states.; Entrenched policy outcomes can be locked in through either electoral or legislative means — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 161
• QUESTION: Which entrenchment forms prove more sticky once constitutionalized—bipartisan lock-ins that neither side wants to break, or partisan insulation that the minority will attack at the first opportunity?

Broader Connections

• State admission policy can entrench policy by selectively admitting states. #expands (0.95)
• Entrenched policy outcomes can be locked in through either electoral or legislative means #expands (0.72) — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 161