The Case Against the Supreme Court

August 11, 2014
Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar from the University of California, Irvine, offers an accessible, refreshingly candid, and no-holds-barred indictment of the Supreme Court. Chemerinsky crafts his argument based on past Court decisions that are universally deemed to be on the wrong side of history, and on a stinging analysis of the more recent judgments of the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts. His thesis is built on the analysis of an array of Court opinions that address fundamental issues in American society. Chemerinsky’s own opinions are direct and unambiguous. Among a long list of issues, he finds the Court wanting in its approach to the problems of racial equality and protecting the rights of citizens in times of crisis, and condemns the Roberts Court’s rulings on voting rights, campaign finance, and the rights of citizens to sue for redress for governmental misconduct. Chemerinsky’s evaluation of the famously liberal Warren Supreme Court is particularly interesting for his claim that “it could have and should have done so much more.” He is sensitive to the charge that his (correctly) perceived liberal bias will undercut his thesis and responds that many of the criticized opinions are wrong from any perspective, liberal or conservative. An insightful analysis that advances much to consider, especially in light of recent controversial opinions.