Book Read Free

Packing the Court: The Rise of Judicial Power and the Coming Crisis of the Supreme Court

Page 34

by James Macgregor Burns


  240 [Corporate political advertising case] : FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, No. 06-969, slip opinion (U.S. June 25, 2007).

  240 [“Millionaire’s Amendment” case] : Davis v. FEC, No. 07-320, slip opinion (U.S. June 26, 2008).

  240 [Texas gerrymander case] : League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006).

  240 [Roberts-Scalia voting, 2007] : Linda Greenhouse, “In Steps Big and Small, Supreme Court Moved Right,” New York Times, July 1, 2007, pp. 1, 18, figure at p. 18.

  240 [Kennedy on hearings “sham”] : Kennedy, “Roberts and Alito Misled Us,” Washington Post, July 30, 2006, pp. B1, B4, quoted at p. B4.

  241 [“one clear and focused”] : quoted in Reynolds Holding, “In Defense of Dissents,” Time, vol. 169, no. 9 (February 26, 2007), p. 44.

  241 [“it is intolerable”] : Bowles v. Russell, Souter dissent, slip opinion quoted at 1.

  241 [“strained and unpersuasive”] : District of Columbia v. Heller, Stevens dissent, slip opinion quoted at 3-4.

  241 [“power, not reason”] : Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991), Marshall’s dissent quoted at 844.

  241 [“It is not often”] : Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Limit the Use of Race in School Plans for Integration,” New York Times, June 29, 2007, pp. A1, A24 , quoted at p. A24.

  241 [“differently composed”] : Gonzales v. Carhart, Ginsburg dissent, slip opinion quoted at 24. The 2000 precedent was Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).

  241 [“modest judge”] : quoted in Lazarus, p. 24.

  241 [Dworkin on Roberts’s “subterfuge”] : Dworkin, “Supreme Court Phalanx,” p. 98.

  242 [“faux judicial restraint”] : FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Scalia concurrence, slip opinion quoted at 17 fn. 7.

  242 [5-4 decisions, 2008] : Linda Greenhouse, “On Court That Defied Labeling, Kennedy Made the Boldest Mark,” New York Times, June 29, 2008, pp. 1, 18, figure at p. 1.

  242 [Baze] : No. 07-5439, slip opinion (U.S. April 16, 2008).

  243 [Crawford] : No. 07-21, slip opinion (U.S. April 28, 2008).

  243 [Indiana nuns] : Deborah Hastings, “Indiana Nuns Lacking ID Denied at Poll by Fellow Sister,” May 6, 2008, Associated Press article posted on Breitbart.com, http://w w w.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90GBCNO0 & show_article =1.

  243 [“pretty darn conservative”] : quoted in Rosen, “The Dissenter,” p. 52.

  243 [“Including myself ”] : ibid., pp. 52-53.

  244 [“legal equivalent”] : State Department lawyer David Bowker quoting the words of a colleague, in Michael Isikoff and Stuart Taylor, Jr., “The Gitmo Fallout,” Newsweek, vol. 148, no. 3 ( July 17, 2006), pp. 22-25, quoted at p. 23.

  244 [Hamdan] : No. 05-184, slip opinion (U.S. June 26, 2006), Thomas dissent quoted at 1.

  245 [“Congress here has spoken”] : quoted in Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Ready to Answer Detainee Rights Questions,” New York Times, December 6, 2007, p. A32.

  245 [Davis on show trials] : Ross Tuttle, “Rigged Trials at Gitmo,” Nation, vol. 286, no. 9 (March 10, 2008), pp. 4-6.

  245 [Boumediene] : No. 06-1195, slip opinion (U.S. June 12, 2008), opinion of the court quoted at 5.

  245 [“ judicial activism”] : ibid., Roberts dissent, slip opinion quoted at 6, 1, respectively.

  245 [“at war”] : ibid., Scalia dissent, slip opinion quoted at 2.

  246 [“locked up”] : ibid., Souter concurrence, slip opinion quoted at 2.

  246 [“inherent executive powers”] : John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, “The President’s Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations Against Terrorists and Nations Supporting Them,” Memorandum Opinion for the Deputy Counsel to the President, September 25, 2001. http://www.usdoj.gov/ olc/warpowers925.htm .

  EPILOGUE-ENDING JUDICIAL SUPREMACY

  David Adamany, “Legitimacy, Realigning Elections, and the Supreme Court,” Wisconsin Law Review, vol. 3 (1978), pp. 790-846.

  James MacGregor Burns, Leadership (Harper & Row, 1978).

  James MacGregor Burns, Transforming Leadership: The New Pursuit of Happiness (Grove/ Atlantic, 2003).

  Edward S. Corwin, Court over Constitution: A Study of Judicial Review as an Instrument of Popular Government (Princeton University Press, 1938).

  Robert A. Dahl, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker,” Journal of Public Law, vol. 6 (1957), pp. 279-95.

  Neal Devins and Keith E. Whittington, eds., Congress and the Constitution (Duke University Press, 2005).

  Louis Fisher, Constitutional Dialogues: Interpretation as Political Process (Princeton University Press, 1988).

  Daniel Hamilton, ed., “A Symposium on The People Themselves (Kramer),” Chicago-Kent Law Review, vol. 81, no. 3 (2006).

  Ronald Kahn and Ken I. Kersch, eds., The Supreme Court and American Political Development (University Press of Kansas, 2006).

  Larry D. Kramer, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (Oxford University Press, 2004).

  Robert Kuttner, Obama’s Challenge: America’s Economic Crisis and the Power of a Transformative Presidency (Chelsea Green, 2008).

  Simon Lazarus, “Repealing the 20th Century,” American Prospect, vol. 18, no. 12 (December 2007), pp. 19-22.

  Sanford Levinson, ed., Responding to Imperfection: The Theory and Practice of Constitutional Amendment (Princeton University Press, 1995).

  Gary L. McDowell, Curbing the Courts: The Constitution and the Limits of Judicial Power (Louisiana State University Press, 1988).

  Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (Crown, 2006).

  J. Mitchell Pickerell, Constitutional Deliberation in Congress: The Impact of Judicial Review in a Separated System (Duke University Press, 2004).

  Jamin B. Raskin, Overruling Democracy: The Supreme Court vs. The American People (Routledge, 2003).

  Jeffrey Rosen, “Supreme Court Inc.,” New York Times Magazine, March 16, 2008, pp. 38-45, 66-71.

  Mark Tushnet, “Democracy Versus Judicial Review,” Dissent, vol. 52, no. 2 (Spring 2005), pp. 59-63.

  Mark Tushnet, The New Constitutional Order (Princeton University Press, 2003).

  Mark Tushnet, Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts (Princeton University Press, 1999).

  John R. Vile, The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought (Praeger, 1992).

  John R. Vile, Contemporary Questions Surrounding the Constitutional Amending Process (Praeger, 1993).

  G. Edward White, “The Constitutional Journey of ‘Marbury v. Madison,’ ” Virginia Law Review, vol. 89, no. 6 (October 2003), pp. 1463-1573.

  Keith E. Whittington, Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History (Princeton University Press, 2007).

  Norman R. Williams, “The People’s Constitution” (review of Kramer), Stanford Law Review, vol. 57, no. 1 (October 2004), pp. 257-90.

  247 [“not just of the past”] : Obama, p. 85.

  247 [“incredibly right”] : ibid., pp. 90, 92, 93, 92, 95, respectively.

  248 [“how to think ”] : ibid., pp. 89, 90.

  248 [“what it means”] : quoted in Stephanie Mencimer, “The Stakes 2008: The Courts,” Washington Monthly, vol. 40, no. 9 (August-September-October 2008), pp. 20-22, quoted at p. 21.

  249 [“people on the bench”] : quoted in David G. Savage, “Two Visions of the Supreme Court,” Los Angeles Times, May 19, 2008, p. A8.

  250 [“repeal the 20th Century”] : Lazarus.

  251 [“at every stage”] : Strum, “Leadership and Equality: A Social Scientist at Work,” in Michael R. Beschloss and Thomas E. Cronin, eds., Essays in Honor of James MacGregor Burns (Prentice-Hall, 1989), pp. 181-205, quoted at p. 183.

  252 [“opinions deem’d unsound”] : Marshall to Justice Samuel Chase, letter of January 23, [1805], in Marshall, Papers, Herbert A. Johnson, ed. (University of North Carolina Press, 1974
-2006), vol. 6, pp. 347-48, quoted at p. 347.

  255 [“kind of transubstantiation”] : Corwin, p. 68.

  257 [“constitutional disputes”] : Whittington, p. 287.

  258 [“preeminently a place”] : Anne O’Hare McCormick, “Roosevelt’s View of the Big Job,” New York Times Magazine, September 11, 1932, pp. 1-2, 16, quoted at p. 2.

  INDEX

  abortion

  Akron and

  partial-birth

  Planned Parenthood and

  Roe and, see Roe v. Wade

  Webster and

  Abraham, Henry

  Abrams, Jacob

  Abrams v. U.S.

  activism, see judicial activism

  Adair v. U.S.

  Adams, Henry

  Adams, John

  court-packing by

  Marshall appointed by

  Sedition Act and

  Adams, John Quincy

  Adams, Thomas

  African Americans:

  freed slaves, in Reconstruction

  Populists and

  Reconstruction Amendments and

  see also segregation; slavery

  Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) (1933)

  Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health

  Alito, Samuel

  appointed to Supreme Court

  as member of conservative “phalanx,”

  American Bar Association

  American Railway Union

  Anti-Federalism

  antitrust

  Sherman Anti-Trust Act

  Arthur, Chester A.

  Articles of Confederation

  Audacity of Hope, The (Obama)

  Babbitt, Bruce

  Bailey v. Drexel Furniture

  Baker, Howard

  Baker v. Carr

  Baldwin, Henry

  Baldwin, Luther

  Bank of the United States

  Barbour, Philip

  Bates, Edward

  Baze v. Rees

  Beard, Charles

  Bickel, Alexander

  Bill of Rights

  nationalization of

  in “preferred position,”

  birth control

  Black, Hugo

  absolutism of

  appointed to Supreme Court

  Bill of Rights and

  civil liberties and

  Frankfurter and

  as leader of liberal activist bloc

  Japanese-American cases and

  Rosenbergs and

  Black Monday

  Blackmun, Harry A.

  appointed to Supreme Court

  Roe and

  Blair, John

  Blatchford, Samuel

  Bopp, James, Jr.

  Bork, Robert

  Boumediene, Lakhdar

  Boumediene v. Bush

  Bradley, Joseph P.

  appointed to Supreme Court

  Civil Rights Cases and

  as member of 1876 electoral commission

  Munn and

  Slaughterhouse and

  Brandeis, Louis D.

  appointed to Supreme Court

  as dissenter

  free speech cases and

  as legal modernizer

  Breckinridge, John

  Brennan, William

  appointed to Supreme Court

  Constitution as viewed by

  Warren Court activism and

  Brewer, David J.

  Debs case and

  Northern Securities and

  Social Darwinism of

  substantive due process and

  Breyer, Stephen G.

  British parliamentary system

  Brown, David

  Brown, Henry B.

  Brownell, Herbert

  Brown v. Board of Education

  Brutus

  Bryan, William Jennings

  Buchanan, James Dred Scott and

  Burger, Warren

  appointed chief justice

  Roe and

  Burton, Harold

  Bush, George H. W.

  Supreme Court appointments by

  Bush, George W.

  presidential power and

  Supreme Court appointments by

  in 2000 election

  Bush v. Gore

  Butler, Pierce

  Byrnes, James F.

  California

  Edwards

  Japanese Americans in

  Whitney

  Campbell, John

  Cardozo, Benjamin

  Carnegie, Andrew

  Carswell, G. Harrold

  Carter, Jimmy

  Carter Coal Company

  Carter v. Carter Coal Co.

  Catron, John

  Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge

  Chase, Salmon P.

  appointed chief justice

  and legal tender

  Reconstruction and

  Chase, Samuel

  appointed to Supreme Court

  impeachment of

  Sedition Act and

  checks and balances in Constitution

  Cheney, Dick

  Cherokee nation

  Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul R.R. v. Minnesota

  citizenship:

  loyalty and

  national v. state

  City of Boerne v. Flores

  City of Richmond v. Croson

  civil liberties

  Stone Court and

  Warren Court and

  see also constitutional amendments; press, freedom of; religious liberty; speech, freedom of; voting rights

  civil rights, see African Americans; segregation

  Civil Rights Act (1866)

  Civil Rights Act (1875)

  Civil Rights Cases

  civil rights movement

  Civil War

  attitudes of justices toward

  Ex parte Merryman

  Lincoln on presidential war powers

  Supreme Court and financing of

  Supreme Court and Lincoln’s war powers in

  Clark, Tom

  Clay, Henry

  Clayton Act (1914)

  Clement, Paul

  Cleveland, Grover

  Supreme Court appointments by

  Clifford, Nathan

  Clinton, Bill:

  Supreme Court appointments by

  coal industry

  Cohens v. Virginia

  Colegrove v. Green

  Colfax massacre

  commerce clause

  Common Law, The (Holmes)

  communism

  Compromise of 1850,

  Congress:

  authority over slavery of

  authority over Supreme Court of

  authority over states of

  checks and balances and

  impeachment of justices by

  judicial review of acts of

  Judiciary Act of 1789 and

  Judiciary Act of 1801 and

  Lincoln’s war powers and

  majority rule and

  and numbers of justices

  as part of three-horse team of government

  political accountability of

  proposals to limit Supreme Court’s power and

  Reconstruction Amendments and

  Supreme Court’s authority over 132-33

  Supreme Court as third house of

  Conkling, Roscoe

  Constitution, U.S.:

  amending process of

  Article III of

  checks and balances in

  Framers’ intentions in

  interpretation of, see constitutional

  interpretation; judicial activism; judicial

  restraint; judicial review; judicial

  supremacy

 

‹ Prev