Constitutional Fidelity Index
A multi-lens framework for evaluating executive power against constitutional principles. Non-partisan. Transparent. Auditable.
An analytical framework, not a legal determination. Scores reflect structured AI analysis across six interpretive frameworks.
Notable Evaluations
Broadest Consensus
Consensus: Tension
Interpretive frameworks most strongly agree on Plan for US Sovereign Wealth Fund.
View evaluation →
Most Contested
1 contested dim.
Promoting Access to Voting generates the most disagreement across frameworks.
View evaluation →
Strongest Steelman Gap
+38 delta
Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity has the largest gap between strongest defense and consensus.
View evaluation →
How It Works
6 Constitutional Lenses
Every action is evaluated from six distinct interpretive frameworks — Textualist, Originalist, Doctrinalist, Living Constitutionalist, Pragmatist, and Steelman.
7 Dimensions
Scores are assigned across seven constitutional dimensions including individual rights, separation of powers, due process, and democratic legitimacy.
Transparent Scoring
All prompts, scoring schemas, and integrity tests are published. Every evaluation includes full narratives and raw data for independent verification.