No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Political Science of Constitutional Resistance
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 September 2006
Extract
“What do you do when the Supreme Court is wrong?” That question formed the title of a 1979 article in the Public Interest by the late Senator (and political scientist) Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and it resonates today across the political spectrum, as serious criticism of Supreme Court decisions can be found on both Left and Right. Of course if the Supreme Court has supreme authority over the meaning of the Constitution, then either it is incoherent to say the judges can be wrong or there is nothing anyone can do if they are. But everyone admits that erroneous constitutional decisions can evoke constitutional amendments. The question is, what can be done short of that?
- Type
- ASSOCIATION NEWS
- Information
- Copyright
- © 2006 The American Political Science Association
References
Alexander, Larry, and
Frederick Schauer.
1997.
“On Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation.”
Harvard Law Review
110:
1359–87.Google Scholar
Arkes, Hadley.
1992.
First Things.
Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Fisher, Louis.
1985.
Constitutional Dialogues: Interpretation as a Political
Process.
Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Kramer, Larry.
2004.
The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial
Review.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
Moynihan, Daniel Patrick.
1979.
“What Do You Do When the Supreme Court is Wrong?”
Public Interest
57 (fall):
3–24.Google Scholar
Stoner, James R. Jr.
2006.
“Constitutional Resistance.”
Claremont Review of Books
6 (summer):
42–7.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith.
1999.
Constitutional Construction: Divided Powers and Constitutional
Meaning.
Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.