Against Post Liberal Courts And Justice

This book covers how Liberal institutions – constitutional democracy, economic markets, liberal courts, free trade, international human rights – around the world are under assault by the political right and we are witnessing the emergence of post-liberal institutions. These post-liberal institutions are founded on the core conviction that the actions of liberal institutions including the United States Supreme Court are patently unjust. This volume makes the case against post-liberal courts and justice by reconnecting to the principles of moral equality and dignified freedom for all. The intention is to show how there is great untapped potential in the work of Ronald Dworkin’s work to demonstrate that it can help progressive liberals think through the great issues of the day and respond to the contemporary criticisms of the political right. The core themes are concretely illustrated by focusing on some of the most controversial recent post-liberal decisions of the Supreme Court, ranging from election funding to abortion to race-sensitive affirmative action, to economic inequality in an age of increasingly unequal opportunities.

A sitting justice reflects upon the authority of the Supreme CourtÑhow that authority was gained and how measures to restructure the Court could undermine both the Court and the constitutional system of checks and balances that depends on it. A growing chorus of officials and commentators argues that the Supreme Court has become too political. On this view the confirmation process is just an exercise in partisan agenda-setting, and the jurists are no more than Òpoliticians in robesÓÑtheir ostensibly neutral judicial philosophies mere camouflage for conservative or liberal convictions. Stephen Breyer, drawing upon his experience as a Supreme Court justice, sounds a cautionary note. Mindful of the CourtÕs history, he suggests that the judiciaryÕs hard-won authority could be marred by reforms premised on the assumption of ideological bias. Having, as Hamilton observed, Òno influence over either the sword or the purse,Ó the Court earned its authority by making decisions that have, over time, increased the publicÕs trust. If public trust is now in decline, one part of the solution is to promote better understandings of how the judiciary actually works: how judges adhere to their oaths and how they try to avoid considerations of politics and popularity. Breyer warns that political intervention could itself further erode public trust. Without the publicÕs trust, the Court would no longer be able to act as a check on the other branches of government or as a guarantor of the rule of law, risking serious harm to our constitutional system.

“Will likely be the definitive biography. . . . a detailed and fascinating account of how the Supreme Court functioned during Brennan’s long tenure.” —Publishers Weekly (starred review) This is a compelling inside look at the life of William Brennan, a champion of free speech who is widely considered the most influential Supreme Court justice of the twentieth century. Before his death, Brennan granted Stephen Wermiel access to volumes of personal and court materials that at the time were sealed to the public for another two decades. This “coveted set of documents,” as Jeffrey Toobin described it, includes Brennan’s case histories—in which he recorded strategies behind major battles including Roe v. Wade, affirmative action, the death penalty, obscenity law, and the constitutional right to privacy—as well as more personal documents that reveal some of Brennan’s curious contradictions, like his refusal to hire female clerks even as he wrote groundbreaking women’s rights decisions; his complex stance as a justice and a Catholic; and details on Brennan’s unprecedented working relationship with Chief Justice Earl Warren. In this biography, Wermiel and Seth Stern distill decades of valuable information into a seamless, riveting portrait of the man behind the Court’s most liberal era. “The most comprehensive and well-organized look at the legendary liberal jurist to date.” —The New York Times “Seats the reader in Brennan’s chambers to listen to his conversations and see the memoranda exchanged with other justices and his law clerks.” —Newark Star Ledger “The authors balance differing accounts of Brennan the jurist and the man, presenting an evenhanded portrait of the affable but stubborn Justice.” —Kirkus Reviews

This book provides a comprehensive exploration of ideological patterns of judicial behaviour in the Supreme Court of Canada. Relying on an expansive database of Canadian Supreme Court rulings between 1984 and 2003, the authors present the most systematic discussion of the attitudinal model of decision making ever conducted outside the setting of the US Supreme Court. The groundbreaking discussion of the viability of this model as a unifying theory of judicial behaviour in high courts around the world will be essential reading for a wide range of legal scholars and court watchers.

The Supreme Court is one of the most extraordinary institutions in our system of government. Charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, the nine unelected justices of the Court have the awesome power to strike down laws enacted by our elected representatives. Why does the public accept the Court’s decisions as legitimate and follow them, even when those decisions are highly unpopular? What must the Court do to maintain the public’s faith? How can the Court help make our democracy work? These are the questions that Justice Stephen Breyer tackles in this groundbreaking book. Today we assume that when the Court rules, the public will obey. But Breyer declares that we cannot take the public’s confidence in the Court for granted. He reminds us that at various moments in our history, the Court’s decisions were disobeyed or ignored. And through investigations of past cases, concerning the Cherokee Indians, slavery, and Brown v. Board of Education, he brilliantly captures the steps—and the missteps—the Court took on the road to establishing its legitimacy as the guardian of the Constitution. Justice Breyer discusses what the Court must do going forward to maintain that public confidence and argues for interpreting the Constitution in a way that works in practice. He forcefully rejects competing approaches that look exclusively to the Constitution’s text or to the eighteenth-century views of the framers. Instead, he advocates a pragmatic approach that applies unchanging constitutional values to ever-changing circumstances—an approach that will best demonstrate to the public that the Constitution continues to serve us well. The Court, he believes, must also respect the roles that other actors—such as the president, Congress, administrative agencies, and the states—play in our democracy, and he emphasizes the Court’s obligation to build cooperative relationships with them. Finally, Justice Breyer examines the Court’s recent decisions concerning the detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, contrasting these decisions with rulings concerning the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. He uses these cases to show how the Court can promote workable government by respecting the roles of other constitutional actors without compromising constitutional principles. Making Our Democracy Work is a tour de force of history and philosophy, offering an original approach to interpreting the Constitution that judges, lawyers, and scholars will look to for many years to come. And it further establishes Justice Breyer as one of the Court’s greatest intellectuals and a leading legal voice of our time.

An original and compelling vision of a just society“A ‘new view’ of the theoretical foundations of liberalism that will ‘challenge us to clarify our own implicit notions of liberal democracy.’ ”—The New York Times Book ReviewWinner of a Certificate of Merit for the American Bar Association's 1981 Gavel Award for outstanding public serviceFirst published in 1980 and continuously in print ever since, Bruce Ackerman's classic Social Justice in the Liberal State offers a new foundation for liberal political theory— a world in which each of us may live his or her own life in his or her own way, without denying the same right to others. Full of provocative discussions of issues ranging from education to abortion, it makes fascinating reading for anyone concerned with the future of the liberal democratic state. “Professor Ackerman has tackled age-old problems of social justice with the refreshing technique of a series of dialogues in which the proponent of a position must either confront his opponent with an answer, constrained by the three principles of rationality, consistency, and neutrality, or submit to a checkmate. The author’s ability to combine earthiness with extreme subtlety in framing the dialogues has produced a novel, mind-stretching book.”—Henry J. Friendly, Senior Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit“What limits should we place on genetic manipulation? How many children should we have? How should we regulate abortions and adoptions? What rights does the community have, what rights do parents have in the education of children? What rights do children have? What resources must we leave to future generations? To see all these as questions of distributive justice is to connect them in a new way (and to make) a significant contribution.”—Michael Walzer, The New Republic “The breadth of the attack on the fundamental issues of man and society is impressive.”—Foreign Affairs

Provocative, inspiring, and unflinchingly honest, My Grandfather's Son is the story of one of America's most remarkable and controversial leaders, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, told in his own words. Thomas speaks out, revealing the pieces of his life he holds dear, detailing the suffering and injustices he has overcome, including the polarizing Senate hearing involving a former aide, Anita Hill, and the depression and despair it created in his own life and the lives of those closest to him. In this candid and deeply moving memoir, a quintessential American tale of hardship and grit, Clarence Thomas recounts his astonishing journey for the first time.

American law assumes that individuals are autonomous, defined by their capacity to choose, and not obligated to each other. But our bodies make us vulnerable and dependent, and the law leaves the weakest on their own. O. Carter Snead argues for a paradigm that recognizes embodiment, enabling law and policy to provide for the care that people need.