Choice In a discussion that ranges from review of the Supreme Court's decisions on federalism and war powers to speech, religion, race, and separation of powers, the authors ably demonstrate how constitutional interpretation is a dialogue among the judiciary, Congress, and the president, with the latter two often either acquiescing in judicial supremacy for political reasons or choosing to ignore it for the same. This is an excellent supplement for collections on law, the
Supreme Court, and national politics.
The Law and Politics Book Review Few surpass Devins and Fisher in the scrupulousness and comprehensiveness of their knowledge of the constitutional text, as well as of the ways in which, over the course of American history, the meaning of the text has been parsed, separately and conjunctively, by the Court, the Congress, and the executive branch.... a model for the way they believe constitutional questions should be discussed.... The author's historical knowledge is deep enough for them to have seen
Perspectives on Politics ...well-suited for use as a supplementary graduate text...packed with useful information. For those who still assume that our Constitution only lives in Supreme Court opinions, the book will be an eye-opening corrective.
Neal Devins, Goodrich Professor of Law, Professor of Government, Director, Institute of Bill of Rights Law and Director, Election Law Program, William and Mary Louis Fischer, Senior Specialist in Separation of Powers, Congressional Research Service
Preface ; Introduction ; 1. Judicial Supremacy as Orthodoxy ; 2. Who Participates? ; 3. Federalism ; 4. Separation of Powers ; 5. The War Power ; 6. Privacy ; 7. Race ; 8. Speech ; 9. Religion ; 10. The Ongoing Dialogue ; Notes ; Case Index ; Subject Index