That Eminent Tribunal: Judicial Supremacy and the Constitution

Christopher Wolfe
Princeton University Press, 2009 M02 9 - 256 páginas

The role of the United States Supreme Court has been deeply controversial throughout American history. Should the Court undertake the task of guarding a wide variety of controversial and often unenumerated rights? Or should it confine itself to enforcing specific constitutional provisions, leaving other issues (even those of rights) to the democratic process?

That Eminent Tribunal brings together a distinguished group of legal scholars and political scientists who argue that the Court's power has exceeded its appropriate bounds, and that sound republican principles require greater limits on that power. They reach this conclusion by an interesting variety of paths, and despite varied political convictions.

Some of the essays debate the explicit claims to constitutional authority laid out by the Supreme Court itself in Planned Parenthood v. Casey and similar cases, and others focus on the defenses of judicial authority found commonly in legal scholarship (e.g., the allegedly superior moral reasoning of judges, or judges' supposed track record of superior political decision making). The authors find these arguments wanting and contend that the principles of republicanism and the contemporary form of judicial review exercised by the Supreme Court are fundamentally incompatible.

The contributors include Hadley Arkes, Gerard V. Bradley, George Liebmann, Michael McConnell, Robert F. Nagel, Jack Wade Nowlin, Steven D. Smith, Jeremy Waldron, Keith E. Whittington, Christopher Wolfe, and Michael P. Zuckert.

Dentro del libro

Comentarios de la gente - Escribir un comentario

No encontramos ningún comentario en los lugares habituales.

Páginas seleccionadas


CHAPTER 1 Is the Constitution Whatever the Winners Say It Is?
CHAPTER 2 Nationhood and Judicial Supremacy
CHAPTER 3 Casey at the BatTaking Another Swing at Planned Parenthood v Casey
The Vices of the Judges Enter a New Stage
CHAPTER 5 Judicial Power and the Withering of Civil Society
CHAPTER 6 The Academy the Courts and the Culture of Rationalism
CHAPTER 7 Judicial Moral Expertise and RealWorld Constraints on Judicial Moral Reasoning
CHAPTER 8 Toward a More Balanced History of the Supreme Court
CHAPTER 9 Judicial Review and Republican Government Jeremy Waldron
Supreme Legislator or Prudent Umpire?
CHAPTER 11 The Rehnquist Court and Conservative Judicial Activism
Derechos de autor

Otras ediciones - Ver todas

Términos y frases comunes

Acerca del autor (2009)

Christopher Wolfe is Professor of Political Science at Marquette University. He is the author of How to Interpret the Constitution, Judicial Activism, and The Rise of Modern Judicial Review.

Información bibliográfica