This session explores the argument, heard lately with increasing frequency, that over-reliance on the courts has undermined progressive goals. Some have asserted that Roe v. Wade, the Massachusetts Goodridge v. Department of Health decision mandating marriage equality, and even Brown v. Board of Education, were counter-productive because they short-circuited the political process, polarized debate, and fueled conservative activism. Are the factual premises of this "backlash thesis" correct? Are progressive setbacks attributable to excessive reliance on the courts? Where would we be without the landmark rights-based decisions of the last several decades? Should progressives approach the courts differently at this time in history?

• Edward Lazarus,  Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP  (Introduction: Real Video / Windows Media)
  
• Scott Lemieux, Professor of Political Science, Hunter College  (Real Video / Windows Media)
  
• Robert C. Post, Professor of Law, Yale Law School  (Real Video / Windows Media)
• Jeffrey Rosen, Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School  (Real Video / Windows Media)
• Reva Siegel, Professor of Law, Yale Law School  (Real Video / Windows Media)
• Roger Wilkins, Professor of History and American Culture, George Mason University  (Real Video / Windows Media)

Link to discussion: Real Video / Windows Media