Understanding the Court Dynamic
Edited by Earl M. Maltz
Choice Outstanding Title
With seven of its justices appointed by Republican presidents, today's Supreme Court has significantly altered America's legal landscape since 1986 by tilting constitutional jurisprudence to the right. That was the goal of Presidents Reagan and Bush in filling court vacancies and has been felt in cases related to federalism, economic rights, and affirmative action. However, liberal issues such as abortion have moved only marginally to the right, while rulings by the Court on school prayer and gay rights have moved constitutional doctrine slightly to the left.
“A masterful and prolific analysis of the Rehnquist Court’s constitutional jurisprudence and the driving force behind it. . . . This is an engaging volume. It is written for professionals and students, but it is clear and concise enough for a general audience.”
—Perspectives on Political Science
“A first-rate collection that deserves the attention of anyone who is interested in understanding the doctrinal developments of this Supreme Court.”
—Political Science QuarterlySee all reviews...
“A seminal work and a significant contribution to understanding the U.S. Supreme Court under the Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Essential for all levels.”
“An invaluable contribution to our understanding of how the Court works and resolves a deficit one might find in other assessments of the Rehnquist Court. Here the justices are treated as individuals, which will no doubt ensure the relevance of its work to future scholarship.”
—Law and Politics Book Review
“An essential volume for understanding the interactions and disagreements among the nine current members of the Rehnquist Court.”
—John Anthony Maltese, author of The Selling of Supreme Court Nominees
“Students of constitutional law and politics, as well as general readers interested in the Supreme Court, will find this collective portrait of ‘the Rehnquist Court’ insightful and rewarding.”
—David OBrien, author of Storm Center: The Supreme Court in American Politics
“A wonderful volume that will make great reading in constitutional law courses at almost any level.”
—R. Shep Melnick, author of Regulation and the Courts
“A provocative book that is must reading for students of constitutional politics.”
—Tinsley E. Yarbrough, author of The Rehnquist Court and the ConstitutionSee fewer reviews...
In this collection of original articles, prominent constitutional scholars are joined by new voices from the cutting edge of academia to subject the Rehnquist Court to closer scrutiny—and to show that its brand of conservatism is less extreme than many have supposed. Reflecting views across the political spectrum, the contributors help readers understand the Court dynamic, its constrained conservatism, and the forces that shape constitutional law in general.
As these authors show, the overall pattern of decision-making in the Rehnquist era cannot be attributed to any single, unified approach to constitutional analysis. Instead, today's Court can only be understood as the product of a complex interaction among individual justices, each with an idiosyncratic view of the proper interpretation of the Constitution and the role of the Court in the American political system.
These provocative essays are designed to provide readers with insight into this interaction by focusing on each member of the bench. From the staunch conservatism of Clarence Thomas, to the "accommodationism" of Sandra Day O'Connor, to the "liberal constitutionalism" of David Souter, the essays analyze the unique approach of each justice to interpreting the Constitution. They also show that the current justices are the product of a nomination and confirmation process that has undergone a major transformation in recent decades—one which favors experienced, often unknown jurists over high-profile public servants.
By concentrating attention on its members, Rehnquist Justice allows us to better understand the Supreme Court as a whole. And by assessing today's judiciary in light of a public philosophy that looks askance at government, it shows us that the Supreme Court has truly become a mirror of its times.