From time to time, the question comes up whether rollback arguments ("X would happen and Congress would repeal/the courts would strike down the plan!") are made irrelevant by fiat. These two little bits of history are intriguingly proximate to that question, and might make good examples: can a government enact a measure and declare it non-repealable
? Might be worth a little further reading about the two incidents, especially if you were a history or political science buff in the first place. The Suber work it references is an online book located here
, by the way. Looks like interesting summer reading.