After the strum and drang on the constitutionality of deem and pass, there seems to be less hyperventilation from the blogosphere on the constitutionality of deem and pass. For example Jack Balkin is now also citing Field v. Clark (see my earlier post here relying on Field v. Clark for the proposition that deem and pass is constitutional) for the proposition that the procedure would be effectively unreviewable. In my view, the constitutional question is pretty much settled. Left unexplored however is how the current Court might react to deem and pass. This is a question that will pit the formalists versus the pragmatists.