Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Foreword: Making Sense Of An Eighteenth-Century Constitution In A Twenty-First-Century World, Mark A. Graber
Foreword: Making Sense Of An Eighteenth-Century Constitution In A Twenty-First-Century World, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
The Maryland Constitutional Law Schmooze, "An Eighteenth-Century Constitution in a Twenty-First-Century World" explores the interpretive and political challenges inherent in recourse to an ancient text for resolving political questions. Although no Essay cites Quentin Skinner, the debates between participants in the Schmooze and this Symposium mirror the debates between Skinner and his critics. Some participants insist that crucial aspects of an eighteenth-century text remain vibrant at present, that contemporary political life would be improved by more careful study of the Constitution. Others blame crucial pathologies of American politics on a combination of too careful study of and too uncritical veneration …
Looking Off The Ball: Constitutional Law And American Politics, Mark A. Graber
Looking Off The Ball: Constitutional Law And American Politics, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
“Looking Off the Ball” details how and why constitutional law influences both judicial and public decision making. Treating justices as free to express their partisan commitments may seem to explain Bush v. Gore*, but not the judicial failure to intervene in the other numerous presidential elections in which the candidate favored by most members of the Supreme Court lost. Constitutional norms and standards generate legal agreements among persons who dispute the underlying merits of particular policies under constitutional attack. The norms and standards explain constitutional criticism, why only a small proportion of the political questions that occupy Americans are normally …
False Modesty: Felix Frankfurter And The Tradition Of Judicial Restraint, Mark A. Graber
False Modesty: Felix Frankfurter And The Tradition Of Judicial Restraint, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
Professor Jeffrey Rosen is the leading champion of judicial modesty among legal academics and public philosophers. Throughout his career, Professor Rosen has vigorously condemned justices “when they have tried to impose intensely contested visions of the Constitution on a divided nation.” This commentary on his Foulston lecture at Washburn Law School suggests that proponents of judicial restraint must avoid traps of false modesty which ensnared Justice Felix Frankfurter. The constitutional politics responsible for Poe v. Ullman and Barnette v. West Virginia State Board of Education challenge the too simple understanding of judicial unilateralism that Frankfurter advanced in his opinions in …