Liberal Constitutionalism and Populism in Latin America: A Need for a New Approach?

Abstract Constitutional law faces unprecedented challenges from populist movements that threaten the longstanding relationship between legitimacy of law and democracy. This paper examines populism through a contextual perspective, focusing specifically on Latin America’s distinctive features and its over two hundred years of constitutional experiences. Rather than coining a universal concept, we argue that populism is manifold and context-dependent, requiring careful attention to historical and geographical particularities. Latin America, with its 155 regime changes between 1900 and 2000, represents an indispensable source for understanding populism globally. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Müller, Laclau, Landau, Scheppele, and Mouffe, we explore how Latin American populisms diverge from patterns elsewhere, particularly through their emphasis on centralization of power rather than nationalism, and their fluid movement across the political spectrum. We examine institutional mechanisms commonly proposed to counterbalance authoritarianism, demonstrating that blind faith in institutions proves insufficient in contexts of weak institutionalization. The paper concludes that constitutional theory must adopt a comprehensive approach, one that values both institutional and non-institutional dimensions, while remaining highly open to inputs from the socio-cultural world, ultimately questioning which constitutionalism and which institutions should be defended.