Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2000

University of Richmond

Brown v. Board of Education

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Looking Sideways, Looking Backwards, Looking Forwards: Judicial Review Vs. Democracy In Comparative Perspective, Ran Hirschl Jan 2000

Looking Sideways, Looking Backwards, Looking Forwards: Judicial Review Vs. Democracy In Comparative Perspective, Ran Hirschl

University of Richmond Law Review

For the [past] two centuries, the Constitution [has been] as central to American political culture as the New Testament was to medieval Europe. Just as Milton believed that "all wisdom is enfolded" within the pages of the Bible, all good Americans, from the National Rifle Association to the ACLU, have believed no less of this singular document.


Reanimator: Mark Tushnet And The Second Coming Of The Imperial Presidency, Neal Devins Jan 2000

Reanimator: Mark Tushnet And The Second Coming Of The Imperial Presidency, Neal Devins

University of Richmond Law Review

A world without judicial review? Not that long ago-when the Left fought tooth and nail to defend the legacy ofthe Warren and (much of the) Burger Courts-the thought of taking the Constitution away from the courts would have been horrific. Witness, for example, Edward Kennedy's depiction of "Robert Bork's America!' as "a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, [and] rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids." Bork's sin, of course, was embracing a kind of populist constitutional discourse, that is, the notion that the founders "banked …


Populist Natural Law (Reflections On Tushnet's "Thin Constitution"), Frank I. Michelman Jan 2000

Populist Natural Law (Reflections On Tushnet's "Thin Constitution"), Frank I. Michelman

University of Richmond Law Review

Constitutional review is the activity of measuring action choices of governments against a pre-existing set of publicly known or ascertainable, "higher" norms for the conduct of government. Anyone can do it: chief executives pondering vetoes or preparing state messages; legislators contemplating legal change; police chiefs reviewing department manuals; school board members debating curriculum guides; city planners routing highway expansions; citizens lobbying and pundits castigating any or all of the above; dinner partners talking politics; candidates running for office; voters turning out rascals. "American-style judicial review," let us say, is constitutional review conducted by a nonpopular, unelected, life-tenured body, whose decisions, …


Herbert Wechsler's Complaint And The Revival Of Grand Constitutional Theory, Keith E. Whittington Jan 2000

Herbert Wechsler's Complaint And The Revival Of Grand Constitutional Theory, Keith E. Whittington

University of Richmond Law Review

In 1988, Mark Tushnet noted the "revival of grand theory in constitutional law." Tushnet was somewhat unusual in specifying the object of contemporary constitutional theory so precisely. As he noted, what had been revived in the late twentieth century was an "interest in comprehensive normative theories of constitutional law." There was relatively little broad concern with constitutionalism in this revival, but quite a lot of concern with justifying and elaborating the preferred constitutional decisions of the Supreme Court in specific cases. Having "just published a book on constitutional theory that I unsurprisingly but undoubtedly erroneously regard as the last word …


Our Imperial First Amendment, Paul D. Carrington Jan 2000

Our Imperial First Amendment, Paul D. Carrington

University of Richmond Law Review

I come to the First Amendment not as a member of the cogno- scenti, but as an observer of the secondary effects on judicial institutions of some interpretations of the Amendment made over the last thirty-five years or so. I deplore those specific effects and I will be direct in saying so. But in considering them, I have been struck by the extent of the federal courts' progress in subordinating to their own governance a wide range of other issues of great concern to citizens, all in the name of the First Amendment, a text intended to foster democratic institutions.