Taking Back the Constitution

How the Supreme Court’s move to the right has distorted both logic and the Constitution

The Supreme Court has never simply evaluated laws and arguments in light of permanent and immutable constitutional meanings, and social, moral, and yes, political ideas have always played into Supreme Court justices’ impressions of how they think a case should be decided. Mark Tushnet traces the ways constitutional thought has evolved from the liberalism of the New Deal and Great Society to the Reagan conservatism that has been dominant since the 1980s.
 
Looking at the current crossroads in the constitutional order, Tushnet explores the possibilities of either a Trumpian entrenchment of the most extreme ideas of the Reagan philosophy, or a dramatic and destabilizing move to the left. Wary of either outcome, he offers a passionate and informed argument for replacing judicial supremacy with popular constitutionalism—a move that would restore the other branches of government’s role in deciding constitutional questions.

Modul in care miscarea Curtii Supreme spre dreapta a denaturat atat logica, cat si Constitutia. Curtea Suprema nu a evaluat niciodata pur si simplu legile si argumentele in lumina semnificatiilor constitutionale permanente si imuabile, iar ideile politice, sociale, morale si da, au jucat intotdeauna in Curtea Suprema. impresiile judecatorilor cu privire la modul in care cred ca ar trebui decis un caz.