Taking back the Constitution: Activist judges and the next age of American law / by Mark Tushnet
Material type:
- 9780300245981
- 347.73035 TUS
Item type | Current library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Central Library | 347.73035 TUS (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available | 000702 |
Browsing Central Library shelves Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Introduction
Part One. Where We Are Now
1. Calling Balls and Strikes
2. Originalisms
3. Playing Politics
4. “We’ve Done Enough”: The Constitutional Law of Race
5. The Court and Conservative Movements
6. Culture Wars, Yesterday and Today
Part Two. Where a Modern Republican Supreme Court Might Take Us
7. Strengthening a New Constitutional Order: Partisan Entrenchment and Fulfilling Campaign Pledges
8. The Business Agenda
9. Deconstructing the Administrative State
10. Possibilities Thwarted and Revived
11. The Weaponized First Amendment
Part Three. Progressive Alternatives—The Short Run
12. Winning Elections, Enacting Statutes
13. Putting Courts on the Progressive Agenda
14. Playing Constitutional Hardball
Part Four. Progressive Alternatives—The Long Run
15. Popular Constitutionalism Versus Judicial Supremacy
16. Amending the Constitution
Conclusion. 2020 and After
Appendix: Strategies of Supreme Court Decision-Making
Notes
Index
"The Supreme Court has never simply evaluated laws and arguments in light of permanent and immutable constitutional meanings, and social, moral, and yes, political ideas have always played into Supreme Court justices' impressions of how they think a case should be decided. Mark Tushnet traces the ways constitutional thought has evolved from the liberalism of the New Deal and Great Society to the Reagan conservatism that has been dominant since the 1980s. Looking at the current crossroads in the constitutional order, Tushnet explores the possibilities of either a Trumpian entrenchment of the most extreme ideas of the Reagan philosophy, or a dramatic and destabilizing move to the left. Wary of either outcome, he offers a passionate and informed argument for replacing judicial supremacy with popular constitutionalism-a move that would restore the other branches of government's role in deciding constitutional questions"--Provided by the publisher. ( Source: WorldCat)
There are no comments on this title.