Description
Book SynopsisWho should decide what is constitutional? The Supreme Court, of course, both liberal and conservative voices say - but in a bracing critique of the ""judicial engagement"" that is ascendant on the legal right, Greg Weiner makes a cogent case to the contrary.
Trade ReviewIn this insightful study, Greg Weiner explains why the Supreme Court on constitutional matters should not be treated as an entirely independent branch. Instead, it is part of the political process and fully Subject to independent analysis, public debate, and the system of checks and balances. In the act of governing, the judiciary is a coequal partner, not a superior branch." - Louis Fisher, author of
Reconsidering Judicial Finality: Why the Supreme Court Is Not the Last Word on the Constitution"
The Political Constitution argues that legal theorists from across the ideological spectrum too often prefer the authority of unelected judges to the messiness of democracy. The Declaration of Independence promises not only ‘Inalienable Rights,’ but also ‘The Consent of the Governed.’ Greg Weiner calls upon judges to leave space for democratic deliberation on constitutional questions and urges elected officials and ordinary citizens to take responsibility for this difficult but essential work." - James H. Read, author of
Majority Rule versus Consensus: The Political Thought of John C. CalhounTable of Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- 1. A Republican Constitution
- 2. The Politics of Obligation
- 3. Madison's Judges
- 4. The Antipolitical Constitution
- 5. Cases and Controversies
- Notes
- Index
