In the Balance
An examination of the initial years of the Roberts Court and the intellectual battle between Roberts and Kagan for leadership.
When John Roberts was appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court, he said he would act as an umpire. Instead, his Court is reshaping legal precedent through decisions unmistakably—though not always predictably—determined by politics as much as by law, on a Court almost perfectly politically divided.Harvard Law School professor and constitutional law expert Mark Tushnet clarifies the lines of conflict and what is at stake on the Supreme Court as it hangs “in the balance” between its conservatives and its liberals.Clear and deeply knowledgeable on both points of law and the Court’s key players, Tushnet offers a nuanced and surprising examination of the initial years of the Roberts Court. Covering the legal philosophies that have informed decisions on major cases such as the Affordable Care Act, the political structures behind Court appointments, and the face-off between John Roberts and Elena Kagan for intellectual dominance of the Court, In the Balance is a must-read for anyone looking for fresh insight into the Court’s impact on the everyday lives of Americans.
Baker & Taylor
A constitutional law expert examines the initial years of the Roberts Court, covering the legal philosophies that have informed decisions on such major cases as the Affordable Care Act, the political structures behind Court appointments and the struggle for intellectual dominance of the Court. (This book was previously featured in
Broadly a story about conservatism and liberalism today, it also involves the politics of appointments and the law of constitutional law. Tushnet reminds us that timing is everything--justices reflect the general views of the political parties at the historical moment when they are appointed, e.g.,Anthony Kennedy's Republican Party was not the party of George Bush. He describes the Roberts Court as pro-business contrary to what Roberts revealed at his confirmation hearing about his plan, when he used the metaphor of the umpire. Former law professor Barack Obama once said that ninety-five percent of the cases that come before the court will be disposed of by adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory or constitutional construction, while disposition of five percent of the cases will be decided in the justice's heart; in other words, the critical ingredient is extralegal. The author describes the structure of constitutional doctrine in order to show how politics dominates law. In seven chapters, he offers the reader an account of the Roberts Court that tries to make sense of the Court's work as part of contemporary politics, and he predicts that the Court will remain balanced between politics and law until new appointees reshape it. This concise and interesting book is for academics and fans of the Supreme Court. Annotation ©2013 Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)
law and politics on the Roberts Court
From the critics
AgeAdd Age Suitability
There are no ages for this title yet.
SummaryAdd a Summary
There are no summaries for this title yet.
NoticesAdd a Notice
There are no notices for this title yet.
QuotesAdd a Quote
There are no quotes for this title yet.
VideosAdd a Video
There are no videos for this title yet.
Find it at NYPL
Buy It Now
Support your library, keep it forever!View Purchase Options Learn more about this program
Hello! We noticed you have the following items in your cart right now:
If you'd still like to purchase the items you have in your cart, you can do that now.
You'll be able to purchase your eBook after you have checked out your current cart.
To continue with your eBook purchase immediately, you can clear your cart by clicking below.
All items will be removed from your cart.
I'd like to keep browsing! I'll decide later.