Constitutional Computation is a proposed computational paradigm in which legitimacy is elevated to a first-class computational primitive. Traditional computational models describe how state changes occur. Constitutional Computation extends these models by requiring that state transitions be justified through constitutional admission before effects may be executed. The framework introduces constitutions, petitions, capabilities, authorities, admission judgments, proof objects, receipts, and constitution-constrained effect semantics as formal components of computation. Computation is modeled as authorized transformation rather than unrestricted state transition. Every effect is petitioned, evaluated against a constitution, admitted or denied, receipted, and only then allowed to alter system state. The paper presents a formal model of Constitutional Computation, defines constitutional reachability, establishes relationships to capability systems, proof-carrying code, event sourcing, distributed systems, and operational semantics, and introduces the concept of Constitutional Machines as justified transition systems. The model provides foundations for governed artificial intelligence, explainable software, capability-secure systems, semantic observability, constitutional operating systems, and future computational substrates in which execution and justification are inseparable. Constitutional Computation can be viewed as a conservative extension of labeled transition systems that constrains mechanically possible transitions to those admitting justification under a governing constitution.
Adam Ableman Mazurk (Wed,) studied this question.