2020 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 2(2) addressing citizenship regimes’. 12 Shaw’s book, she argues, opens a new way to capture and analyse this relation. The contribution by Natalie Baird shifts the focus to ‘the shadow of statelessness’, which ‘lurks throughout the book without being its central focus’. 13 She discusses how constitutions regulate (or fail to regulate) statelessness, arguing that it does not come as a surprise that most constitutions remain silent on those excluded from ‘the people’. She finds, however, that whenever constitutional provisions on statelessness actually exist, they can provide ‘a constitutional bulwark’ useful for protecting the rights of stateless persons. 14 Baird underlines Shaw’s insistence on the profound impact of discrimination on both citizenship and statelessness. 15 Finally, drawing on Shaw’s analysis of a fragmented governance of citizenship across different levels, she suggests that the emerging international framework on citizenship can offer innovative and creative ways to strengthen the framing of citizenship and statelessness in rights terms. Julija Sardelić’s contribution keeps the focus on those at the margins of constitutional citizenship and asks what Shaw’s contemplation on the relations between the concepts of citizenship, constitutions and the people could mean for marginalised minorities. 16 Sardelić uses the case of Romani minorities claiming access to water rights in Slovenia and the resistance of the settler-colonial states Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 17 as examples to illustrate how majority citizens strategically use the notion of the constitutional to exclude minority populations and how these minorities, in turn, struggle to secure their constitutional rights as citizens on an equal basis. She thereby aptly illustrates the ambivalences enshrined in Shaw’s concept of constitutional citizenship. She highlights the close connections between race, discrimination and exclusion that underpin Shaw’s analysis of constitutional citizenship. Sardelić’s contribution shows how important Shaw’s concept of constitutional citizenship is for finally recognising marginalised minorities and indigenous populations in the definition of ‘the people’. Kriszta Kovács’ contribution finally zooms in on the populist challenge to constitutional citizenship identified by Shaw as one of the developments that puts constitutional citizenship under pressure. 18 Kovács first reflects on the definition of populism in Shaw’s book and compares it to other theoretical accounts of populism. On that basis she discusses how ethnonational populists strategically reinterpret the concepts of the people and sovereignty for their political goals. She illustrates how a populist understanding of ‘the people’ differs from constitutionalist approaches and how this allows popular sovereignty to be reframed as national sovereignty and be established as an ethnic vision of ‘we the 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Johanna Hase, ‘The Constitutional Citizen in Narratives of Peoplehood’ (2020) 2(2) Statelessness & Citizenship Review 372, 375. Shaw (n 1) 59. Natalie Baird, ‘Constitutions, Citizenship and the Shadow of Statelessness’ (2020) 2(2) Stateleessness & Citizenship Review 377, 379. ibid 379–80. Julija Sardelić, ‘Citizenship, Constitutions and People on the Margins’ (2020) 2(2) Statelessness & Citizenship Review 384. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Doc A/RES/61/295 (2 October 2007) (‘UNDRIP’). Kriszta Kovacs, ‘People, Sovereignty and Citizenship: The Ethnonational Populists’ Constitutional Vocabulary’ (2020) 2(2) Statelessness & Citizenship Review 389. 370