240 [Corporate political advertising case] : FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, No. 06-969, slip opinion (U.S. June 25, 2007).
   240 [“Millionaire’s Amendment” case] : Davis v. FEC, No. 07-320, slip opinion (U.S. June 26, 2008).
   240 [Texas gerrymander case] : League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006).
   240 [Roberts-Scalia voting, 2007] : Linda Greenhouse, “In Steps Big and Small, Supreme Court Moved Right,” New York Times, July 1, 2007, pp. 1, 18, figure at p. 18.
   240 [Kennedy on hearings “sham”] : Kennedy, “Roberts and Alito Misled Us,” Washington Post, July 30, 2006, pp. B1, B4, quoted at p. B4.
   241 [“one clear and focused”] : quoted in Reynolds Holding, “In Defense of Dissents,” Time, vol. 169, no. 9 (February 26, 2007), p. 44.
   241 [“it is intolerable”] : Bowles v. Russell, Souter dissent, slip opinion quoted at 1.
   241 [“strained and unpersuasive”] : District of Columbia v. Heller, Stevens dissent, slip opinion quoted at 3-4.
   241 [“power, not reason”] : Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (1991), Marshall’s dissent quoted at 844.
   241 [“It is not often”] : Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Limit the Use of Race in School Plans for Integration,” New York Times, June 29, 2007, pp. A1, A24 , quoted at p. A24.
   241 [“differently composed”] : Gonzales v. Carhart, Ginsburg dissent, slip opinion quoted at 24. The 2000 precedent was Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).
   241 [“modest judge”] : quoted in Lazarus, p. 24.
   241 [Dworkin on Roberts’s “subterfuge”] : Dworkin, “Supreme Court Phalanx,” p. 98.
   242 [“faux judicial restraint”] : FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Scalia concurrence, slip opinion quoted at 17 fn. 7.
   242 [5-4 decisions, 2008] : Linda Greenhouse, “On Court That Defied Labeling, Kennedy Made the Boldest Mark,” New York Times, June 29, 2008, pp. 1, 18, figure at p. 1.
   242 [Baze] : No. 07-5439, slip opinion (U.S. April 16, 2008).
   243 [Crawford] : No. 07-21, slip opinion (U.S. April 28, 2008).
   243 [Indiana nuns] : Deborah Hastings, “Indiana Nuns Lacking ID Denied at Poll by Fellow Sister,” May 6, 2008, Associated Press article posted on Breitbart.com, http://w w w.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90GBCNO0 & show_article =1.
   243 [“pretty darn conservative”] : quoted in Rosen, “The Dissenter,” p. 52.
   243 [“Including myself ”] : ibid., pp. 52-53.
   244 [“legal equivalent”] : State Department lawyer David Bowker quoting the words of a colleague, in Michael Isikoff and Stuart Taylor, Jr., “The Gitmo Fallout,” Newsweek, vol. 148, no. 3 ( July 17, 2006), pp. 22-25, quoted at p. 23.
   244 [Hamdan] : No. 05-184, slip opinion (U.S. June 26, 2006), Thomas dissent quoted at 1.
   245 [“Congress here has spoken”] : quoted in Linda Greenhouse, “Justices Ready to Answer Detainee Rights Questions,” New York Times, December 6, 2007, p. A32.
   245 [Davis on show trials] : Ross Tuttle, “Rigged Trials at Gitmo,” Nation, vol. 286, no. 9 (March 10, 2008), pp. 4-6.
   245 [Boumediene] : No. 06-1195, slip opinion (U.S. June 12, 2008), opinion of the court quoted at 5.
   245 [“ judicial activism”] : ibid., Roberts dissent, slip opinion quoted at 6, 1, respectively.
   245 [“at war”] : ibid., Scalia dissent, slip opinion quoted at 2.
   246 [“locked up”] : ibid., Souter concurrence, slip opinion quoted at 2.
   246 [“inherent executive powers”] : John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, “The President’s Constitutional Authority to Conduct Military Operations Against Terrorists and Nations Supporting Them,” Memorandum Opinion for the Deputy Counsel to the President, September 25, 2001. http://www.usdoj.gov/ olc/warpowers925.htm .
   EPILOGUE-ENDING JUDICIAL SUPREMACY
   David Adamany, “Legitimacy, Realigning Elections, and the Supreme Court,” Wisconsin Law Review, vol. 3 (1978), pp. 790-846.
   James MacGregor Burns, Leadership (Harper & Row, 1978).
   James MacGregor Burns, Transforming Leadership: The New Pursuit of Happiness (Grove/ Atlantic, 2003).
   Edward S. Corwin, Court over Constitution: A Study of Judicial Review as an Instrument of Popular Government (Princeton University Press, 1938).
   Robert A. Dahl, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker,” Journal of Public Law, vol. 6 (1957), pp. 279-95.
   Neal Devins and Keith E. Whittington, eds., Congress and the Constitution (Duke University Press, 2005).
   Louis Fisher, Constitutional Dialogues: Interpretation as Political Process (Princeton University Press, 1988).
   Daniel Hamilton, ed., “A Symposium on The People Themselves (Kramer),” Chicago-Kent Law Review, vol. 81, no. 3 (2006).
   Ronald Kahn and Ken I. Kersch, eds., The Supreme Court and American Political Development (University Press of Kansas, 2006).
   Larry D. Kramer, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (Oxford University Press, 2004).
   Robert Kuttner, Obama’s Challenge: America’s Economic Crisis and the Power of a Transformative Presidency (Chelsea Green, 2008).
   Simon Lazarus, “Repealing the 20th Century,” American Prospect, vol. 18, no. 12 (December 2007), pp. 19-22.
   Sanford Levinson, ed., Responding to Imperfection: The Theory and Practice of Constitutional Amendment (Princeton University Press, 1995).
   Gary L. McDowell, Curbing the Courts: The Constitution and the Limits of Judicial Power (Louisiana State University Press, 1988).
   Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (Crown, 2006).
   J. Mitchell Pickerell, Constitutional Deliberation in Congress: The Impact of Judicial Review in a Separated System (Duke University Press, 2004).
   Jamin B. Raskin, Overruling Democracy: The Supreme Court vs. The American People (Routledge, 2003).
   Jeffrey Rosen, “Supreme Court Inc.,” New York Times Magazine, March 16, 2008, pp. 38-45, 66-71.
   Mark Tushnet, “Democracy Versus Judicial Review,” Dissent, vol. 52, no. 2 (Spring 2005), pp. 59-63.
   Mark Tushnet, The New Constitutional Order (Princeton University Press, 2003).
   Mark Tushnet, Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts (Princeton University Press, 1999).
   John R. Vile, The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought (Praeger, 1992).
   John R. Vile, Contemporary Questions Surrounding the Constitutional Amending Process (Praeger, 1993).
   G. Edward White, “The Constitutional Journey of ‘Marbury v. Madison,’ ” Virginia Law Review, vol. 89, no. 6 (October 2003), pp. 1463-1573.
   Keith E. Whittington, Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History (Princeton University Press, 2007).
   Norman R. Williams, “The People’s Constitution” (review of Kramer), Stanford Law Review, vol. 57, no. 1 (October 2004), pp. 257-90.
   247 [“not just of the past”] : Obama, p. 85.
   247 [“incredibly right”] : ibid., pp. 90, 92, 93, 92, 95, respectively.
   248 [“how to think ”] : ibid., pp. 89, 90.
   248 [“what it means”] : quoted in Stephanie Mencimer, “The Stakes 2008: The Courts,” Washington Monthly, vol. 40, no. 9 (August-September-October 2008), pp. 20-22, quoted at p. 21.
   249 [“people on the bench”] : quoted in David G. Savage, “Two Visions of the Supreme Court,” Los Angeles Times, May 19, 2008, p. A8.
   250 [“repeal the 20th Century”] : Lazarus.
   251 [“at every stage”] : Strum, “Leadership and Equality: A Social Scientist at Work,” in Michael R. Beschloss and Thomas E. Cronin, eds., Essays in Honor of James MacGregor Burns (Prentice-Hall, 1989), pp. 181-205, quoted at p. 183.
   252 [“opinions deem’d unsound”] : Marshall to Justice Samuel Chase, letter of January 23, [1805], in Marshall, Papers, Herbert A. Johnson, ed. (University of North Carolina Press, 1974
-2006), vol. 6, pp. 347-48, quoted at p. 347.
   255 [“kind of transubstantiation”] : Corwin, p. 68.
   257 [“constitutional disputes”] : Whittington, p. 287.
   258 [“preeminently a place”] : Anne O’Hare McCormick, “Roosevelt’s View of the Big Job,” New York Times Magazine, September 11, 1932, pp. 1-2, 16, quoted at p. 2.
   INDEX
   abortion
   Akron and
   partial-birth
   Planned Parenthood and
   Roe and, see Roe v. Wade
   Webster and
   Abraham, Henry
   Abrams, Jacob
   Abrams v. U.S.
   activism, see judicial activism
   Adair v. U.S.
   Adams, Henry
   Adams, John
   court-packing by
   Marshall appointed by
   Sedition Act and
   Adams, John Quincy
   Adams, Thomas
   African Americans:
   freed slaves, in Reconstruction
   Populists and
   Reconstruction Amendments and
   see also segregation; slavery
   Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) (1933)
   Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health
   Alito, Samuel
   appointed to Supreme Court
   as member of conservative “phalanx,”
   American Bar Association
   American Railway Union
   Anti-Federalism
   antitrust
   Sherman Anti-Trust Act
   Arthur, Chester A.
   Articles of Confederation
   Audacity of Hope, The (Obama)
   Babbitt, Bruce
   Bailey v. Drexel Furniture
   Baker, Howard
   Baker v. Carr
   Baldwin, Henry
   Baldwin, Luther
   Bank of the United States
   Barbour, Philip
   Bates, Edward
   Baze v. Rees
   Beard, Charles
   Bickel, Alexander
   Bill of Rights
   nationalization of
   in “preferred position,”
   birth control
   Black, Hugo
   absolutism of
   appointed to Supreme Court
   Bill of Rights and
   civil liberties and
   Frankfurter and
   as leader of liberal activist bloc
   Japanese-American cases and
   Rosenbergs and
   Black Monday
   Blackmun, Harry A.
   appointed to Supreme Court
   Roe and
   Blair, John
   Blatchford, Samuel
   Bopp, James, Jr.
   Bork, Robert
   Boumediene, Lakhdar
   Boumediene v. Bush
   Bradley, Joseph P.
   appointed to Supreme Court
   Civil Rights Cases and
   as member of 1876 electoral commission
   Munn and
   Slaughterhouse and
   Brandeis, Louis D.
   appointed to Supreme Court
   as dissenter
   free speech cases and
   as legal modernizer
   Breckinridge, John
   Brennan, William
   appointed to Supreme Court
   Constitution as viewed by
   Warren Court activism and
   Brewer, David J.
   Debs case and
   Northern Securities and
   Social Darwinism of
   substantive due process and
   Breyer, Stephen G.
   British parliamentary system
   Brown, David
   Brown, Henry B.
   Brownell, Herbert
   Brown v. Board of Education
   Brutus
   Bryan, William Jennings
   Buchanan, James Dred Scott and
   Burger, Warren
   appointed chief justice
   Roe and
   Burton, Harold
   Bush, George H. W.
   Supreme Court appointments by
   Bush, George W.
   presidential power and
   Supreme Court appointments by
   in 2000 election
   Bush v. Gore
   Butler, Pierce
   Byrnes, James F.
   California
   Edwards
   Japanese Americans in
   Whitney
   Campbell, John
   Cardozo, Benjamin
   Carnegie, Andrew
   Carswell, G. Harrold
   Carter, Jimmy
   Carter Coal Company
   Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
   Catron, John
   Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge
   Chase, Salmon P.
   appointed chief justice
   and legal tender
   Reconstruction and
   Chase, Samuel
   appointed to Supreme Court
   impeachment of
   Sedition Act and
   checks and balances in Constitution
   Cheney, Dick
   Cherokee nation
   Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul R.R. v. Minnesota
   citizenship:
   loyalty and
   national v. state
   City of Boerne v. Flores
   City of Richmond v. Croson
   civil liberties
   Stone Court and
   Warren Court and
   see also constitutional amendments; press, freedom of; religious liberty; speech, freedom of; voting rights
   civil rights, see African Americans; segregation
   Civil Rights Act (1866)
   Civil Rights Act (1875)
   Civil Rights Cases
   civil rights movement
   Civil War
   attitudes of justices toward
   Ex parte Merryman
   Lincoln on presidential war powers
   Supreme Court and financing of
   Supreme Court and Lincoln’s war powers in
   Clark, Tom
   Clay, Henry
   Clayton Act (1914)
   Clement, Paul
   Cleveland, Grover
   Supreme Court appointments by
   Clifford, Nathan
   Clinton, Bill:
   Supreme Court appointments by
   coal industry
   Cohens v. Virginia
   Colegrove v. Green
   Colfax massacre
   commerce clause
   Common Law, The (Holmes)
   communism
   Compromise of 1850,
   Congress:
   authority over slavery of
   authority over Supreme Court of
   authority over states of
   checks and balances and
   impeachment of justices by
   judicial review of acts of
   Judiciary Act of 1789 and
   Judiciary Act of 1801 and
   Lincoln’s war powers and
   majority rule and
   and numbers of justices
   as part of three-horse team of government
   political accountability of
   proposals to limit Supreme Court’s power and
   Reconstruction Amendments and
   Supreme Court’s authority over 132-33
   Supreme Court as third house of
   Conkling, Roscoe
   Constitution, U.S.:
   amending process of
   Article III of
   checks and balances in
   Framers’ intentions in
   interpretation of, see constitutional
   interpretation; judicial activism; judicial
   restraint; judicial review; judicial
   supremacy
   
 
 Packing the Court: The Rise of Judicial Power and the Coming Crisis of the Supreme Court Page 34