AO1: Interest groups are more likely to ensure the effective working of the Constitution because they are able to take on a significant role in the US political system because the separation of powers and checks and balances can limit effective government AO2: Interest groups can therefore fill the political vacuum caused by the frequent gridlock between the branches of government and also within the branches that separation of powers can create AO3: In times of divided government it can be very difficult to gain agreement amongst all groups on the shape of a bill and so many bills fail which means that the role of interest groups and lobbying becomes vital for ensuring members of Congress seek compromise and agreement AO1: Interest groups allows for an alternative method of ensuring the Constitution can be updated to despite the long and arduous amendment process AO2: Interest groups are able to campaign to uphold the key principles of the Constitution either through new legislation or amicus curiae or initiating cases AO3: This means that much interest groups have the power to make amendments to the political system by directly influencing legislation through lobbying or through the courts e.g. same-sex marriage was legalised through Obergefell v Hodges AO1: Interest groups play a vital role in challenging some aspects of the Constitution which have been criticised as being unfit for a modern democratic society AO2: This includes some of the amendments themselves e.g. the 2nd amendment, the electoral process, the amendment procedure itself, the system of checks and balances, which have become difficult to amend because they are embedded in the culture of US society AO3: Therefore some aspects of the Constitution are arguably kept in place because they are traditional features of US society and government rather than features of a modern democratic society and only the campaigning of interest groups helps to ensure democracy is upheld AO1: Federalism means that state governments have reserved powers over issues not explicitly referenced in the Constitution, thus allowing interest groups another access point for upholding the Constitution. AO2: This is especially important in issues related to civil rights where interest groups have been able to use state initiatives and propositions and the state courts. AO3: Interest groups are therefore able to ensure the Constitution works effectively by targeting state governments as well as the federal government, often using state laws and rulings to then go on to challenge constitutional issues on a federal level.

AO1: Interest groups are not always necessary to guarantee the Constitution works effectively as the system of checks and balances and the separation of powers does still effectively ensure that legislation is carefully considered and carries majority support AO2: This prevents any one part of government dominating another and forcing through rushed legislation, even in a time of united government, as intended by the founders of the Constitution AO3: Therefore, the Constitution still allows society to be protected from one dominant political group in government without the courts or interest groups AO1: Interest groups who may have disproportionate power because of political links or campaign finance are prevented from having undue influence over the constitution by the amendment procedure, which was designed to be difficult and time- consuming to avoid rapid or controversial changes being made too easily AO2: The difficulty in amending the Constitution has been demonstrated in the past, with lengthy debates over proposed amendments to ban flag- burning which is at odds with the 1st amendment guaranteeing free speech AO3: This suggests that the amendment procedure actually benefits society and is a democratic way of ensuring the constitution works effectively by preventing potential amendments that could affect individuals or groups of individuals adversely being brought about by powerful interest groups AO1: The development of judicial review, allows the Supreme Court to be the more effective protector of the US Constitution, as this allows the court to rule on aspects of modern society that could not be provided for in the Constitution e.g. on issues of privacy AO2: The Constitution was designed to be brief and ambiguous to allow the political system to develop as necessary to meet the needs of an evolving society AO3: This makes the Constitution more flexible than it first seems and allows the Supreme Court to directly make changes without the need for a formal amendment such as the legalising of same-sex marriage on Obergefell v Hodges, whereas interest groups are reliant on the support of elected officials or the Supreme Court itself to have an impact on the working of the Constitution AO1: It could be argued that the Constitution is not well protected by interest groups or the Supreme Court, particularly as the power of judicial review has arguably grown beyond that intended by the Founding Fathers AO2: Campaigns by interest groups- particularly on controversial issues- which are often related to constitutional matters, for example, always not heard by the Supreme Court as they may choose to avoid hearing such cases for fear of causing conflict with the legislature or the executive AO3: This means that some parts of the Constitution or issues related to the Constitution are not operating effectively in the modern era, as the Constitution is open to interpretation in places and yet is not always being discussed by the courts