The Myth of Judicial Activism
WARNING
You are viewing an older version of the Yalebooks website. Please visit out new website with more updated information and a better user experience: https://www.yalebooks.com
Making Sense of Supreme Court Decisions
Kermit Roosevelt III
View Inside
Format: ClothPrice: $32.00
e-book
Out of Print
Recent years have witnessed an increasing drumbeat of complaints about judicial behavior, focusing particularly on Supreme Court decisions that critics charge are reflections of the Justices’ political preferences rather than enforcement of the Constitution. The author takes a balanced look at these controversial decisions through a compelling new lens of constitutional interpretation. He clarifies the task of the Supreme Court in constitutional cases, then sets out a model to describe how the Court creates doctrine to implement the meaning of the Constitution. Finally, Roosevelt uses this model to show which decisions can be justified as legitimate and which cannot.
"A graceful and compelling account of constitutional decision-making. Roosevelt shows how judges shape workable legal rules from constitutional meanings when reasonable minds can and do disagree. As learned as it is accessible, this book is a welcome antidote to today's overheated constitutional rhetoric."—Jack M. Balkin, Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment, Yale Law School
"Kermit Roosevelt has written a remarkably accessible, conversational book that sets out with admirable clarity what constitutes (and what is not) 'judicial activism' and how we can accept as 'legitimate' decisions with which we disagree. One can only hope that it gets the wide readership it deserves."—Sanford Levinson, author of Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (and How We the People Can Correct It)
"The Legal Theory Bookworm recommends The Myth of Judicial Activism."—Legal Theory Bookworm
Publication Date: October 2, 2006
2 b/w illus.
