Governing From The Bench

In Governing from the Bench, Emmett Macfarlane draws on interviews with current and former justices, law clerks, and other staff members of the court to shed light on the institution’s internal environment and decision-making processes. He explores the complex role of the Supreme Court as an institution; exposes the rules, conventions, and norms that shape and constrain its justices’ behavior; and situates the court in its broader governmental and societal context, as it relates to the elected branches of government, the media, and the public.

This study of the Manitoba judiciary is not only the first biographical history to examine an entire provincial bench, it is also one of the first studies to offer an internal view of the political nature of the judicial appointment process. Dale Brawn has penned the biographies of the first thirty-three men appointed to Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench. The relative youth of Manitoba as a province and the small size of its legal profession makes possible an exceptionally detailed investigation of the background of those appointed to the province's highest trial court. The biographical data that Brawn has collected for this book highlights the extent to which judicial candidates underwent a socialization process designed to produce a legal elite whose members shared remarkably similar views and ways of thinking. In addition, these biographies suggest that until at least 1950, seats on provincial benches were rewards for political services rendered. Many lawyers became judges not because of their legal ability, but because they had made themselves known in the communities in which they practiced. This fascinating study offers an intimate look at personalities ranging from prime ministers to members of the bench and both senior levels of government.

Although there have been many studies of the English revolution and its more dramatic trials, until this book was published in 1971, little attention had been paid to the Long Parliament’s attempts to impeach a number of judges. This book describes how the judges became unpopular, selecting a number of themes – from the development of unanimous decision and opinions, to the role of the judges as agents and supervisors of government policies. The Long Parliament viewed them as the great instrument behind evil policies and believed they had attempted to usurp the power of legislation. Charles I is seen as placing too much reliance on his judges and his failure to realize that legality could not be a perpetual answer to political dissent in the end cost him his throne. The book is intended as an introduction for undergraduates.

The Canadian Senate has long been considered an institutional pariah, viewed as an undemocratic, outmoded warehouse for patronage appointments and mired in spending and workload scandals. In 2014, the federal government was compelled to refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court relating to its attempts to enact senatorial elections and term limits. Constitutional Pariah explores the aftermath of Reference re Senate Reform, which barred major unilateral alteration of the Senate by Parliament. Ironically, the decision resulted in one of the most sweeping parliamentary reforms in Canadian history, creating a pathway to informal changes in the appointments process that have curbed patronage and partisanship. Despite reinvigorating the Senate, Reference re Senate Reform has far-reaching implications for constitutional reform in other contexts. Macfarlane’s sharp critique suggests that the Court’s nebulous approach to the amending formula raises the spectre of a frozen constitution, unable to evolve with the country.

In both law and literature, Nicholas Hasluck has been a player and a commentator. In this fascinating memoir he uses diaries of his time as a Judge and as Chair of the Literature Board to explore intriguing issues at the start of the new century, from culture wars in Australia to al-Qaeda's terrorist attack in New York. He turns an astute gaze on battles in the courts and everyday struggles and delusions. He watches self-styled intellectual leaders nail their colours to the mast with an air of heroic virtue, though nearly everyone in the room agrees with them. In times when history is often misinterpreted, how can we pass on what has been learnt? How can Australians come together to build a better future, rather than denigrating our institutions and shared past? His views are those of a writer with a principled mind and a ready sense of humour.

Who gets seated on the lower federal courts and why? Why are some nominees confirmed easily while others travel a long, hard road to confirmation? What role do senators and interest groups play in determining who will become a federal judge? The lower federal courts have increasingly become the final arbiters of the important political and social issues of the day. As a result, who gets seated on the bench has become a major political issue. In Battle over the Bench, Amy Steigerwalt argues that the key to understanding the dynamics of the lower court confirmation process is to examine the process itself. She offers a new analytic framework for understanding when nominations become contested, and shows when and how key actors can influence the fate of nominations and ultimately determine who will become a federal judge. Given the increasing salience of lower court decisions, it is not surprising that interest groups and partisan agendas play an important role. Steigerwalt inventories the means by which senators push through or block nominations, and why interest groups decide to support or oppose certain nominations. The politics of judicial confirmations do not end there, however. Steigerwalt also reveals how many nominees are blocked for private political reasons that have nothing to do with ideology, while senators may use their support for or opposition to nominees as bargaining chips to garner votes for their positions on unrelated issues. Battle over the Bench showcases the complex and, at times, hidden motivations driving the staffing of the federal bench.

Examining each of the nearly 100 men who have left the US Supreme Court, explores their resignations and retirements from the lifetime tenure. Considers the diverse circumstances under which they leave and clarifies why they often are reluctant to do so, finding factors such as pensions, party loyalty, and personal pride. Also relates physical ailments to mental faculties to explain how a justice's disability can affect Court decisions. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR