New Issue Briefs from ACS
In terms of “readiness to overturn legislation” the Roberts Court is “one of the most activist courts in history” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in late August. On the occasion of the 226th anniversary of the Constitution’s ratification, two leading constitutional law scholars buttress Ginsburg’s assertion with in-depth studies of high court opinions and voting behaviors that reveal the Court’s conservatives are more often the most activist.
University of Chicago law school professor Geoffrey R. Stone examines twenty high-profile Supreme Court cases on constitutional concerns and concludes that the votes of the conservative Justices “cannot be explained by any consistent theory of constitutional interpretation.” Rather, “[t]heir votes in these cases … were determined first-and-foremost by their own personal policy preferences.”
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. famously said during his confirmation process that being a judge is akin to a baseball umpire – you just call balls and strikes. “Anyone who has paid the slightest bit of attention to the workings of the Supreme Court knows that there is much more to being a Justice” than Roberts articulated, George Washington University law school professor Alan B. Morrison writes. His Issue Brief explains when so-called judicial activism is appropriate and when it is harmful.
Our Constitution's Vision and Values