Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:47:13.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Past Does Not Repeat Itself, but It Rhymes: The Second Coming of the Liberal Anti‐Court Movement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Josh Benson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The last ten years have witnessed the reemergence of fears of judicial power among scholars on the left. This renewed “Anti‐Court” movement includes the minimalism of Cass Sunstein, the popular constitutionalism of Mark Tushnet and Larry Kramer, and the bipartisan judicial restraint of Jeffrey Rosen. This essay traces the origin, development, and implications of this movement, noting its particular ties to historic trends in the academy: the Legal Process School, critical theory, and the positivist work of Gerald Rosenberg and Michael Klarman. The essay also considers the movement's preference for majoritarian politics—a partiality borne of dissatisfaction with the Rehnquist Court, but also, conversely, recognition of the failures of conservative attempts at policy making. The essay concludes by considering the ambitions of these scholars to develop a truly apolitical theory of judicial power. In light of the furious debate over the purported “minimalism” of John Roberts, severing theory from politics may prove impossible.

Type
Review Essay
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , Fall 2008 , pp. 1071 - 1110
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, Larry, and Solum, Lawrence, 2005. Popular? Constitutionalism? Harvard Law Review 118 (March): 1594–1640.Google Scholar
Barron, David. 2006. What's Wrong With Conservative Constitutionalism? Two Styles of Progressive Constitutional Critique and the Choice They Present. Harvard Law & Policy Review Online. http://www.hlpronline.com/2006/07/barron_01.html (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Bazelon, Emily. 2007. Sorry Now? Slate.com, June 28. http://www.slate.com/id/2169344/ (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Bickel, Alexander. 1986. The Least Dangerous Branch. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Blasi, Vincent. 1983. The Rootless Activism of the Burger Court. In The Burger Court: The Counter‐Revolution That Wasn't, ed. Blasi, Vincent, 198–217. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bork, Robert H. 1971. Neutral Principles and Some First Amendment Problems. Indiana Law Journal 47 (Fall): 1–35.Google Scholar
Bummiller, Kristen. 1987. Victims Under the Shadow of the Law: A Critique of the Model of Legal Protection. Signs 12 (Spring): 421–39.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Dale. 2003. Judicial Supremacy and Its Discontents. Constitutional Commentary 20 (Summer): 405–36.Google Scholar
Chemerinsky, Erwin. 1984. The Price of Asking the Wrong Question. Texas Law Review 62 (April): 1207–1262.Google Scholar
Chemerinsky, Erwin. 1989. The Vanishing Constitution. Harvard Law Review 103 (November): 43–104.Google Scholar
Chemerinsky, Erwin. 2000. Losing Faith: America Without Judicial Review? Michigan Law Review 98 (May): 1416–35.Google Scholar
Chemerinsky, Erwin. 2004. In Defense of Judicial Review: The Perils of Popular Constitutionalism. University of Illinois Law Review 2004:673–90.Google Scholar
Cohen, Adam. 2006. What Chief Justice Roberts Forgot in His First Term: Judicial Modesty. New York Times, July 9, A11.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1956. Decision‐Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as National Policy‐Maker. Journal of Public Law 6 (Fall): 279–95.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1963. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dellinger, Walter. 2007. The Fine Art of Overruling. Slate.com, June 26. http://www.slate.com/id/2168856/entry/2169195/ (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Dillon, Sam. 2006. Schools’ Efforts Hinge on Justices’ Ruling in Cases on Race and School Assignments. New York Times, June 24, A11.Google Scholar
Dorf, Michael C., and Issacharoff, Samuel. 2001. Can Process Theory Constrain Courts? University of Colorado Law Review 72 (Fall): 923–51.Google Scholar
Frankfurter, Felix, and Hart, Henry M. Jr. 1935. The Business of the Supreme Court at October Term, 1934. Harvard Law Review 49 (November): 68–107.Google Scholar
Friedman, Barry. 2001. The History of the Countermajoritarian Difficulty, Part Three: The Lesson of Lochner . New York University Law Review 76 (November): 1383–1455.Google Scholar
Friedman, Barry. 2002. The Birth of an Academic Obsession: The History of the Counter‐Majoritarian Difficulty, Part Five. Yale Law Journal 112 (November): 153–259.Google Scholar
Friedman, Barry. 2004. Conservative and Progressive Legal Orders: The Cycles of Constitutional Theory. Law and Contemporary Problems 67 (Summer): 149–74.Google Scholar
Gabel, Peter, and Harris, Paul. 1982. Building Power and Breaking Images: Critical Legal Theory and the Practice of Law. New York University Review of Law and Social Change 11 (3): 369–412.Google Scholar
Glendon, Mary Ann, and Kmiec, Douglas W. 2007. The Best Kind of Justice. Legal Times, July 2, 54.Google Scholar
Green, Joshua. 2003. Reagan's Liberal Legacy. Washington Monthly, January 1, 28.Google Scholar
Griffin, Stephen. 2000. Has the Hour of Democracy Come Around at Last? The New Critique of Judicial Review. Constitutional Commentary 17 (Winter): 683–701.Google Scholar
Hand, Learned. 1958. The Bill of Rights. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, Henry M., and Sacks, Albert M. 1994. The Legal Process: Basic Problems in the Making and Application of Law. Westbury, NY: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Horwitz, Morton. 1992. The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kalman, Laura, 1990. Abe Fortas: A Biography. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kalman, Laura, 1996. The Strange Career of Legal Liberalism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Keck, Thomas M. 2004. The Most Activist Supreme Court in History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. 1991. The Puzzling Resistance to Political Process Theory. Virginia Law Review 77 (May): 747–832.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael J. 2004. From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kramer, Larry D. 2001. The Supreme Court v. Balance of Powers. New York Times, March 3, A13.Google Scholar
Kramer, Larry D. 2004. The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lazarus, Edward. 2005. Kennedy Center. New Republic, November 14, 16.Google Scholar
Lithwick, Dahlia. 2005. Getting to “Law‐Plus.” Slate.com, September 15. http://www.slate.com/id/2126131/entry/2126408 (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Lund, Nelson, and Lerner, Craig S. 2006. Precedent Bound? National Review Online, March 6. http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lund_lerner200603060828.asp (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W. 2003. The Making of the Second Rehnquist Court. St. Louis Law Journal 47 (Spring): 569–658.Google Scholar
National Review Online. 2007. The Roberts Court. July 2. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTJhYmRhZDU4NGI3NGUxNjUyNzYwYmU3MzVlMzBlN2Q= (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
New Republic. 2005. Mister Roberts. September 26, 7.Google Scholar
Parker, Richard. 1981. The Past of Constitutional Theory—And Its Future. Ohio State Law Journal 42 (1): 223–60.Google Scholar
Parker, Richard. 1994. “ Here the People Rule:” A Constitutional Populist Manifesto. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Post, Robert C., and Siegel, Reva B. 2000. Equal Protection by Law: Federal Antidiscrimination Legislation After Morrison and Kimel . Yale Law Journal 110 (December): 441–526.Google Scholar
Reynolds, Maura. 2005. Delay Tempers His Statements. Los Angeles Times, April 14, A11.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2005a. Stare Decisis. New Republic, September 19, 12.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2005b. The Unregulated Offensive. New York Times Magazine, April 17, 42.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2006a. The Most Democratic Branch? How the Courts Serve America. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2006b. Restraining Order. New Republic, January 30, 8.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2007. Court Approval. New Republic, July 23, 9.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2006. Courting Disaster: Looking for Change in All the Wrong Places. Drake Law Review 54 (Summer): 795–829.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, Sam. 2005. Disorder in the Court. American Prospect, July, 24.Google Scholar
Rovner, Julie. 2006. Partial‐Birth Abortion: Separating Fact from Spin. NPR.org, February 21. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5168163 (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Sabel, Charles F., and Simon, William H. 2004. Destabilization Rights: How Public Law Litigation Succeeds. Harvard Law Review 117 (February): 1015–1101.Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick. The Court's Agenda—and the Nation's. Harvard Law Review 120 (November): 4–64.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1983. Fathers and Sons: The Court, the Commentators, and the Search for Values. In The Burger Court: The Counter‐Revolution That Wasn't, ed. Blasi, Vincent, 218–38. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Mark. 1994. Judicious Choices: The New Politics of Supreme Court Confirmations. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Simon, William H. 2004. Solving Problems v. Claiming Rights. William and Mary Law Review 46 (October): 127–212.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 1999. One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2003. The Right‐Wing Assault. American Prospect, March, A2.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2004a. Did Brown Matter? New Yorker, May 3, 102.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2004b. The Rehnquist Revolution. New Republic, December 27, 32.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2005a. John Roberts, Minimalist. Wall Street Journal, September 1, A10.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2005b. Latest Assault on Judges Threatens Rule of Law. Los Angeles Times, April 15, B13.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2005c. Minimal Appeal. New Republic, August 1, 17.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2005d. Supreme Court Revolution Barely Stirs Any Notice. USA Today, September 14, 11A.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2005e. Why We Must Strive for Balance. Chicago Tribune, July 6, 27.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2007a. Minimalists v. Visionaries. Washington Post, June 28. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‐dyn/content/article/2007/06/28/AR2007062800991.html (accessed July 15, 2008).Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2007b. Split Decision. New Republic Online, June 29. http://www.tnr.com/ (article no longer available).Google Scholar
Toobin, Jeffrey. 2005. Swing Shift. New Yorker, September 12, 42.Google Scholar
Tribe, Laurence. 1980. The Puzzling Persistence of Process‐Based Theories. Yale Law Journal 89 (May): 1063–80.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 1999. Taking the Constitution Away From the Courts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 2003a. Alarmism Versus Moderation in Responding to the Rehnquist Court. Indiana Law Journal 78 (Winter/Spring): 47–71.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 2003b. The New Constitutional Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 2005. Rehnquist's Mixed Legacy. Salon.com, September 5. http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/feature/2005/09/04/rehnquist_legacy/ (accessed June 22, 2008).Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark. 2007. The First (and Last?) Term of the Roberts Court. Tulsa Law Review 42 (Spring): 495–503.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2006. The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review. Yale Law Journal 115 (April): 1346–1406.Google Scholar
Washington Post. 2005. Confirm John Roberts. September 18, B06.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith. 2000. Herbert Wechsler's Complaint and the Revival of Grand Constitutional Theory. University of Richmond Law Review 34 (May): 509–43.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith. 2004. The New Originalism. Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy 2 (Summer): 599–613.Google Scholar