The article argues that when the Supreme Court decides if a government action is constitutional, it's really about deciding who should make the decision. It suggests looking at the abilities of courts and legislatures to solve problems, and that simple categories like substance and process don't capture the complexity of the issues. The article also says that even if a flaw is found in the legislative process, it doesn't automatically mean the court should take over; it depends on which institution is better suited to make the decision. The article provides examples of this approach and criticizes other ways of looking at constitutional law that focus on judicial reasoning or neutrality.