Ackerman characterizes the regime of the Fifth Republic as a revolutionary constitution. Although surprising at first sight, this way of presenting the French case has the merit of revealing some particularities of the process that led to the current institutions - sometimes neglected in France. However, this analysis also leads Ackerman to set aside important aspects of this process. For example, he neglects the importance of the institutions of the Third Republic, which were a deterrent at the time of the founding of the 1946 Constitution. In the same way, his description of the process that led to the current institutions does not allow for an account of the specificities of De Gaulle's seizure of power in 1958 - notably the fact that, contrary to a common belief, he was forced to make a certain number of concessions to the old parties of the Fourth Republic when drafting the 1958 Constitution. Therefore, Ackerman’s perspective does not make it possible to understand that the presidentialism of the Fifth Republic was not so much the result of the constitution as of the practice that de Gaulle followed afterwards. As for the evolution of the regime since 1958 (following the constitutional amendments of 2000 and 2008), it seems to have moved away from the initial Gaullist conceptions, contrary to what Ackerman suggests. In other words, his original reading of the French case undoubtedly has some merits, but it leaves in the shade many decisive aspects of the regime of the Fifth Republic.