Meaning: The quote provided by Michael Kinsley, a prominent journalist and political commentator, touches on the idea of sovereignty and the power of elected officials in the context of Supreme Court decisions. Kinsley's statement suggests that if the Supreme Court were to rule that certain concessions made by elected officials were unconstitutional, it would ultimately enhance the authority and control of those officials.

The concept of concessions being deemed unconstitutional refers to situations where elected officials may make agreements or compromises that could potentially limit their own power or authority. These concessions could be in the form of legal or policy decisions that are seen as undermining the sovereignty of the elected officials and their ability to govern effectively.

Kinsley's assertion that such a Supreme Court decision would "take them off the table" implies that it would eliminate the possibility for elected officials to make these concessions, thereby protecting their sovereignty and authority. This suggests that without the option to make such concessions, elected officials would be empowered to exercise their full authority without the constraints of agreements that may have previously limited their sovereignty.

The quote also implies that the Supreme Court decision could "increase the effective sovereignty of elected officials," indicating that by removing the possibility of certain concessions, the ruling would strengthen the power and autonomy of elected officials. This increase in sovereignty could result in a more unfettered ability for these officials to govern and make decisions without external limitations imposed by previous concessions.

Kinsley's perspective on this matter reflects a broader discussion about the balance of power between different branches of government and the extent to which elected officials can exercise their authority. In the United States, the concept of checks and balances among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches is fundamental to the functioning of the government. Kinsley's quote suggests that a Supreme Court ruling in this context could potentially shift this balance in favor of the elected officials.

The notion of effective sovereignty is significant in understanding the implications of Kinsley's statement. Sovereignty refers to the supreme authority within a territory, and in the context of elected officials, it pertains to their ability to govern and make decisions without undue interference. By suggesting that a Supreme Court decision could increase the effective sovereignty of elected officials, Kinsley highlights the potential for a significant shift in the dynamics of governance and the exercise of power within the political system.

In conclusion, Michael Kinsley's quote encapsulates the complex interplay between the judiciary, the executive, and the legislative branches of government, as well as the implications of Supreme Court decisions on the sovereignty and authority of elected officials. The idea that ruling certain concessions unconstitutional would enhance the effective sovereignty of elected officials underscores the intricate nature of the legal and political mechanisms that shape the distribution of power in a democratic society.