"If the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal", Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was not alone in believing that the Constitution could be interpreted by any of the three branches of the government. Today, however, the Supreme Court's role as the ultimate ...
Read More
"If the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal", Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln was not alone in believing that the Constitution could be interpreted by any of the three branches of the government. Today, however, the Supreme Court's role as the ultimate arbiter of constitutional matters is widely accepted. But as Robert Burt aims to show in his book, this was not always the case, nor should it be. In a reconstruction of constitutional history, Burt traces the controversy over judicial supremacy back to the founding fathers, with Madison and Hamilton as the principal antagonists. The conflicting views these founders espoused - equal interpretive powers among the federal branches on one hand and judicial supremacy on the other - remain plausible readings of "original intent" and so continue to present us with a choice. Drawing extensively on Lincoln's conception of political equality, Burt argues that judicial supremacy and majority rule are both inconsistent with the egalitarian democratic ideal. The proper tasks of the judiciary, he contends - as epitomized in Brown vs Board of Education - is to actively protect minorities against "enslaving" legislative defeats while, at the same time, to refrain from awarding conclusive "victory" to these minorities against their adversaries. From this premise, Burt goes on to examine key decisions such as Roe vs Wade, US vs Nixon, and the death penalty cases, all of which demonstrate how the Court has fallen away from egalitarian jurisprudence and returned to an essentially authoritarian conception of its role. With an eye to the urgent issues at stake in these cases, Burt identifies the alternative results that an egalitarian conception of judicial authority would dictate. The first fully articulated presentation of the Constitution as a communally interpreted document in which the Supreme Court plays an important, but not predominant, role, "The Constitution in Conflict" has dramatic implications for both the theory and the practice of constitutional law.
Read Less
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $10.87, very good condition, Sold by ThriftBooks-Reno rated 5.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Reno, NV, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $26.99, new condition, Sold by LAURA GONZALES rated 5.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Colorado Springs, CO, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $46.95, very good condition, Sold by AJA Bookstore rated 5.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Venice, CA, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
First Edition, first printing with full number line in near fine/ very good condition. The pages are clean and crisp, in like new condition, with no bent corners. Boards are as new, and the spine is square and tight. The dust jacket has minor shelf wear with a few small nicks and tears at the edges. The book is otherwise in excellent condition with an unclipped DJ, and no remainder mark. All items guaranteed, and a portion of each sale supports social programs in Los Angeles. Ships from CA.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $10.00, very good condition, Sold by Half Price Books Inc rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Dallas, TX, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Very good. Connecting readers with great books since 1972! Used books may not include companion materials, and may have some shelf wear or limited writing. We ship orders daily and Customer Service is our top priority!
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $22.00, like new condition, Sold by Murphy-Brookfield Books rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Iowa City, IA, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $27.00, very good condition, Sold by Murphy-Brookfield Books rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Iowa City, IA, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $39.49, good condition, Sold by Bonita rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Newport Coast, CA, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by Belknap Press.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $39.50, good condition, Sold by Ground Zero Books, Ltd. rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Silver Spring, MD, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by The Belknap Press of Harvard.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Good. 462, footnotes, notes, works cited, index, some wear and soiling to boards and spine. In a remarkably innovative reconstruction of Constitutional history, Burt traces the controversy over judicial supremacy back to the founding fathers, with Madison and Hamilton as the principal antagonists. The conflicting views these founders espoused--equal interpretive powers among the federal branches on one hand and judicial supremacy on the other--remain plausible readings of "original intent" and so continue to present us with a choice. Drawing extensively on Lincoln's conception of political equality, Burt argues convincingly that judicial supremacy and majority rule are both inconsistent with the egalitarian democratic ideal. The proper task of the judiciary, he contends--as epitomized in Brown v. Board of Education--is to actively protect minorities against "enslaving" legislative defeats while, at the same time, to refrain from awarding conclusive "victory" to these minorities against their adversaries. From this premise, Burt goes on to examine key decisions such as Roe v. Wade, U.S. v. Nixon, and the death penalty cases, all of which demonstrate how the Court has fallen away from egalitarian jurisprudence and returned to anessentially authoritarian conception of its role.
Add this copy of The Constitution in Conflict to cart. $41.00, very good condition, Sold by Ground Zero Books, Ltd. rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Silver Spring, MD, UNITED STATES, published 1992 by The Belknap Press of Harvard.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Very good, good. 462, footnotes, notes, works cited, index, small tear and chip in front DJ. In a remarkably innovative reconstruction of Constitutional history, Burt traces the controversy over judicial supremacy back to the founding fathers, with Madison and Hamilton as the principal antagonists. The conflicting views these founders espoused--equal interpretive powers among the federal branches on one hand and judicial supremacy on the other--remain plausible readings of "original intent" and so continue to present us with a choice. Drawing extensively on Lincoln's conception of political equality, Burt argues convincingly that judicial supremacy and majority rule are both inconsistent with the egalitarian democratic ideal. The proper task of the judiciary, he contends--as epitomized in Brown v. Board of Education--is to actively protect minorities against "enslaving" legislative defeats while, at the same time, to refrain from awarding conclusive "victory" to these minorities against their adversaries. From this premise, Burt goes on to examine key decisions such as Roe v. Wade, U.S. v. Nixon, and the death penalty cases, all of which demonstrate how the Court has fallen away from egalitarian jurisprudence and returned to anessentially authoritarian conception of its role.
