|
From the Publisher
The Supreme Court has recently issued decisions announcing that citizens have neither a constitutional right to vote, nor the right to an education. Conservative judges have continually disavowed claims to any rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. In this text, celebrated law professor Jamin B. Raskin, argues that we need to develop a whole new set of rights, through amendments or court decisions, that revitalize and protect the democracy of everyday life. Detailing specific cases through interesting narratives, Overruling Democracy describes the transgressions of the Supreme Court against the Constitution and the people-and the faulty reasoning behind them-and lays out the plan for the best way to back a more democratic system.
From The Critics
The Los Angeles Times
Most compelling, perhaps, is his treatment of the role of the court in institutionalizing a two-party system by making it difficult for new parties to get on the ballot, get into debates or nominate candidates who are also running on other tickets ("fusion candidates"). As Raskin correctly observes, there is nothing in our constitutional history that demands a two-party system, and the state laws that discriminate against third parties generally had their origin in collusion between the Democrats and the Republicans to quash upstarts such as the Populists or Socialists. Yet, despite that history, the court has repeatedly sanctioned state laws that favor the major parties against new contenders: As Rehnquist wrote in 1997, it is permissible for states to enact "election regulations that may, in practice, favor the traditional two-party system and that temper the destabilizing effects of party-splintering and excessive factionalism." Raskin similarly eviscerates the arguments put forward to keep minor party candidates out of public debates, pointing out that it is absurd to require candidates to demonstrate sizable support (such as 15% in the polls) in order to participate in the only events through which they could gain such support. — Alexander Keyssar
Editorial Reviews
From Booklist
Constitutional scholar Raskin uses the Bush versus Gore decision declaring Bush president as a reflection of both the continuing momentum of a rightward swing and the antidemocratic thrust of the U.S. Supreme Court. The use of the equal protection clause of the Constitution, designed to protect the newly freed slaves, as a basis for protecting Bush is symbolic of the inverse practices of the Supreme Court. States' rights, strict constructionism, original intent--these theories associated with the rightist ideologies fell under the political need to ensure that the "right" president was elected. This rightward shift is the consequence of a successful strategy to appoint conservative judges to the federal bench and has resulted in the denial of constitutional rights to an education and to public debate and a narrowing of privacy rights. Raskin argues that conservative jurists have taken an activist posture against popular democracy. In addition to challenging the propriety of this conservative judicial activism, Raskin articulates a plan for counterbalancing that activism
Book Description
The Supreme Court has recently issued decisions announcing that citizens have neither a constitutional right to vote, nor the right to an education. Conservative judges have continually disavowed claims to any rights not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. In Overruling Democracy, celebrated law professor Jamin B. Raskin, argues that we need to develop a whole new set of rights, through amendments or court decisions, that revitalize and protect the democracy of everyday life. Detailing specific cases through interesting narratives, Overruling Democracy describes the transgressions of the Supreme Court against the Constitution and the people - and the faulty reasoning behind them - and lays out the plan for the best way to back a more democratic system.
About the Author
Jamin B. Raskin is Professor of Law at American University, and his articles have appeared in slate, The Washington Monthly, The American Prospect, The Nation, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and many other newspapers, journals, and magazines.
Customer Reviews
Brilliant, As Usual, June 21, 2003
Reviewer from Minneapolis, MN United States
Jamin Raskin is one of the most brilliant constitutional scholars of our time. His arguments are as bullet-proof as they are engaging. It's a must read for anyone interested in the Supreme Court.
Powerful, high-octane liberal manifesto, March 29, 2003
Reviewer: from Somerville, MA United States
This book is extremely useful ammunition for all of us who argue with smug right-wingers. Raskin gets down to the nitty-gritty of what happened in Florida, and what's been happening for 30 years on the Supreme Court. Get this guy on the Supreme Court, already!
|
|
