The standard account of the relation between democracy and the rule of law focuses on law’s liberty-enhancing role in constraining official action. This is a faint echo of the complex, constitutive relation between the two. The Greeks used one word – isonomia – to describe both. If democracy is the system in which people have an equal say in determining the rules that govern social life, then the rule of law is simultaneously before, after, concurrent and synonymous with democracy: It contributes to the formation of citizens with the capacity for self-governance, serves as the instrument through which democratic decisions are implemented, functions as one of the central social practices that constitute citizens as equals and addresses the question of how to ensure that government by the people operates for the people. The rule of law has many independently valuable qualities, including impartiality and predictability. But, to valorise the rule of law for its own sake is to fetishize authority. The fundamental values of the rule of law are as the instrument of democratic self-governance and the expression of the equal dignity of all persons. Democracy thus entails the rule of law, but both implicate the yet more comprehensive ideal of equality. Core rule-of-law values require political norms and conditions of equality, generality and comprehensiveness. In a modern, differentiated society, however, the constitutive relation between democracy and the rule of law is fractured and law becomes the agent of authority. Courts in the modern constitutional state have contributed to the decline of rule-of-law values, supporting role specialization through judge-made immunity doctrines that protect officials at all levels. The crisis of police violence against minorities is a symptom of this breakdown. Greater accountability can ameliorate the problem. But an effective solution requires the fair and equal distribution of political power.

民主与法治之间关系的标准解释侧重于法律在限制官方行为方面的促进自由的作用。这是两者之间复杂的本构关系的微弱回声。希腊人用了一个词——isonomia – 描述两者。如果民主是人们在决定社会生活规则方面拥有平等发言权的制度，那么法治既是民主的先行者，也是民主的后继者，同时也是民主的同义词：它有助于形成具有自我约束能力的公民。 - 治理，作为执行民主决策的工具，是构成公民平等的核心社会实践之一，并解决如何确保民治政府为人民服务的问题。法治具有许多独立的宝贵品质，包括公正性和可预测性。但是，为了法治本身而赋予法治价值就是迷恋权威。法治的基本价值观是民主自治的工具，是所有人平等尊严的体现。因此，民主需要法治，但两者都包含更全面的平等理想。核心法治价值观需要平等、普遍和全面的政治规范和条件。然而，在现代、分化的社会中，民主与法治之间的本构关系断裂，法律成为权威的代理人。现代宪政国家的法院导致法治价值观的衰落，通过法官制定的豁免原则支持角色专业化，保护各级官员。警察对少数族裔的暴力危机就是这种崩溃的一个征兆。加强问责可以改善问题。但有效的解决方案需要公平、平等地分配政治权力。