No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Silverstein's Allure
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 December 2018
Abstract
Using multiple case studies, Gordon Silverstein'sLaw's Allure (2009) examines the many ways in which courts interact with other governing institutions. He convincingly argues that legal advocates fare best when they use the leverage created by courtroom victories to increase their influence in other arenas, particularly legislatures. His more ambitious effort to explain when court intervention improves rather than displaces politics is less successful. He favors using court decisions as battering rams to break through the institutional barriers created by our allegedly outmoded Constitution. Such an open‐ended justification for judicial policy making places virtually no limits on the juridification that Silverstein decries for distorting democratic politics.
- Type
- Review Essay
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2010
References
References
Barrett, St. John. 1970. The New Role of the Courts in Developing Welfare Law. Duke Law Journal
1970:1–23.Google Scholar
Breyer, Stephen. 1993. Breaking the Vicious Cycle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Derthick, Martha. 2005. Up in Smoke: From Legislation to Litigation in Tobacco Politics, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A.
2001. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Liptak, Adam. 2009. Supreme Court to Revisit “Hillary” Documentary. New York Times, August 29.Google Scholar
Mendeloff, John. 1988. The Dilemma of Toxic Substances Regulation: How Overregulation Causes Underregulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 1983. Regulation and the Courts: The Case of the Clean Air Act. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 1989. The Courts, Congress, and Programmatic Right. In Remaking American Politics, ed. Milkis, Sidney and Harris, Richard, 188–212. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 1994. Between the Lines: Interpreting Welfare Rights. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Melnick, R. Shep. 2007. Entrepreneurial Litigation: Advocacy Coalitions and Strategies in the Fragmented American Welfare State. In Remaking America: Democracy and Public Policy in an Age of Inequality, ed. Soss, Joe, Hacker, Jacob, and Mettler, Susanne, 51–73. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N.
2008 1991]. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change?
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1988. Who Guards the Guardians? Judicial Control of Administration. Athens: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Martin. 1993. Public Law and Judicial Politics. In Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, ed. Finifter, Ada, 365–82 Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Gordon. 2009. Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves, and Kills Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tweedie, Jack. 1983. The Politics of Legalization in Special Education. In Special Education Policies: Their History, Implementation, and Finance, ed. Chambers, Jay and Hartman, William, 48–73. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Cases Cited
Connecticut v. American Electric Power Co., 582 F.3d 309 (2d Cir. 2009), reversing 406 F. Supp. 2d 265 (S.D.N.Y. 2005), petition for rehearing en banc filed, No. 05‐5104 (2d Cir. Nov. 17, 2009).Google Scholar
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007).Google Scholar
Randall v. Sorrell, 548 U.S. 230 (2006).Google Scholar