Government under the U.S. Constitution is not parliamentary. To be certain of this, we need notice only two features of American government. First, the person primarily responsible for administering the American government is chosen independently of the national legislature in most circumstances. Second, that person does not depend for continuation in offi ce on majority support in the House of Representatives. During the century of the American founding, the British government was evolving a practice whereby the national legislature’s choice of persons to administer the nation from day to day was consistently accepted by the monarch. Those who could assemble majority support in the elected chamber of the British Parliament were appointed by the monarch as his ministers. Those appointees served formally at the monarch’s pleasure, but in fact their appointments depended on parliamentary support and did not last longer than Parliament’s confi dence in them. Parliamentary systems of government are distinguished by their conformity with the British prototype in four respects, the fi rst two essential and the other two usual. First, the choice of those who will administer government is directly or indirectly determined by a legislature in most circumstances, and second, the chosen ministers depend for their continuation in offi ce on continued majority support in the legislature. Where a legislature is bicameral, control over who will administer government belongs to the legislative chamber that is most representative of the whole population. In addition, in most parliamentary systems, those who will administer government are chosen from among incumbent legislators, and the offi ce of national chief executive is a formal one that does not normally involve actual administrative decision making. There is said to be a separation of “head of state” from “head of government.”

Here’s a refined biography of Laurence P. Claus, drawing from authoritative sources:

🎓 Early Life & Education

• Grew up in Australia.

• Earned a D.Phil. in Law from the University of Oxford.

• Worked at the U.S. Department of Justice in London on foreign litigation cases (talentrocket.de).

⚖️ Legal & Judicial Experience

• Clerked for Judge Frank Easterbrook of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago (talentrocket.de).

• Early legal work included international civil litigation involving the U.S. government.

🧑‍🏫 Academic Career

• On faculty at the University of San Diego School of Law for about 17 years (talentrocket.de).

• Teaches a broad range of subjects: Comparative Constitutional Law, U.S. Constitutional Law, Law of Democracy, Animal Law, and Contract Law (talentrocket.de).

✍️ Scholarship & Publications

• Book: Law’s Evolution and Human Understanding explores law as evolving social practices and was published in the San Diego Law Review (laurenceclaus.com).

• Notable articles include:

  • “Implication and the Concept of a Constitution” (1995),

  • “The One Court that Congress Cannot Take Away…” (2007),

  • “Constitutional Guarantees of the Judiciary…” (2005) (papers.ssrn.com, papers.ssrn.com).

🌍 Influence in Comparative Constitutional Law

• Co-authored a scholarly chapter on “Constitutional Courts as Positive Legislators”—discussing judicial lawmaking in the U.S. context (resolve.cambridge.org).

• His work appears in leading comparative law conferences and publications.

👥 Teaching Philosophy & Community Engagement

• Frequently helps students beyond class through moot court coaching, career guidance, and mentoring (international.vlex.com, talentrocket.de).

• His preferred work routine blends teaching, mentorship, research, writing—and community/social engagement›including running in Balboa Park and evening beach walks (talentrocket.de).

✅ Summary

Laurence P. Claus is:

• An internationally trained scholar (Australia → Oxford → U.S.),

• An expert in constitutional theory, comparative constitutional law, and judicial power,

• A dedicated educator at the University of San Diego,

• A prolific author whose writings influence academic and judicial discourse globally.

Let me know if you'd like an overview of any specific article or his approach to a particular topic!