<![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]>

false 848635 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

Though they claim a devotion to history, Sunstein believes fundamentalists are "seeking to produce a federal judiciary that operates as an arm of the political branches." In making this point, Sunstein shows how "judicial activism" by extreme conservative judges has been on the rise since the Reagan administration, moving the Supreme Court hard to the right in the process. He discusses the implications of this shift on issues such as the right to privacy, marriage, affirmative action, national security, the separation of powers, gun control, and religion in public life, among others. In Radicals in Robes, Sunstein skillfully outlines complex constitutional issues in clear language, making this a useful and thought-provoking book for lay readers and legal experts alike. --Shawn Carkonen

]]> 848635 2 834150 17 8 2005 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America total:18|5:4|4:7|3:4|2:3|1:0| 18 66 39 3 62303 3.54 1136 298 55970782 2313194 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.75 16 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed May 13 14:42:31 -0700 2009 Wed May 13 14:42:31 -0700 2009 Radicals in Robes after Harriett Miers was nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court. I completed it less than 48 hours before "Miers asked Bush" to withdraw her nomination after having been skewered by the right wing of Bush's base. Though Sunstein wasn't writing ...more...]]> 58673644 929023 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 4 0 false Sat Jun 06 00:00:00 -0700 2009 Sat Jun 06 14:21:11 -0700 2009 Sat Jun 06 14:23:00 -0700 2009 3403390 151949 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 5 0 false Mon Jul 23 07:16:54 -0700 2007 Thu Dec 17 01:37:28 -0800 2009
Such as in the Case of Mumia Abu Jamal case.]]> 81954750 3069628 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 4 0 false Thu Dec 24 10:46:06 -0800 2009 Thu Dec 24 10:46:06 -0800 2009 80975578 281409 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Mon Dec 14 10:27:12 -0800 2009 Mon Dec 14 10:27:12 -0800 2009 75648150 1910836 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Sun Oct 25 00:04:29 -0700 2009 Sun Oct 25 00:04:41 -0700 2009 68768664 2036433 848636 0465083277 9780465083275 0 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848636.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848636.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848636.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.00 2 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 4 0 false Mon Aug 24 19:32:23 -0700 2009 Mon Aug 24 19:32:23 -0700 2009 67034086 2119653 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Tue Aug 11 21:42:57 -0700 2009 Tue Aug 11 21:42:57 -0700 2009 62669261 366133 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed Jul 08 14:12:52 -0700 2009 Wed Jul 08 14:12:52 -0700 2009 57583798 1373058 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed May 27 22:52:02 -0700 2009 Wed May 27 22:52:02 -0700 2009 55007691 2220261 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 5 0 false Tue May 05 07:31:19 -0700 2009 Tue May 05 07:31:19 -0700 2009 53612533 1316165 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed Apr 22 11:49:59 -0700 2009 Wed Apr 22 11:50:01 -0700 2009 51902395 1792509 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Tue Apr 07 23:13:01 -0700 2009 Tue Apr 07 23:13:01 -0700 2009 47554343 957390 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 2 0 false Wed Feb 25 19:47:21 -0800 2009 Wed Feb 25 19:47:21 -0800 2009 42564926 1885272 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 5 0 false Sat Jan 10 09:01:06 -0800 2009 Sat Jan 10 09:01:11 -0800 2009 33692675 1553111 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed Sep 24 03:41:22 -0700 2008 Wed Sep 24 03:41:22 -0700 2008 32999206 1527806 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 3 0 false Tue Sep 16 08:13:41 -0700 2008 Tue Sep 16 08:13:41 -0700 2008 32377968 823393 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Mon Sep 08 16:00:11 -0700 2008 Mon Sep 08 16:00:11 -0700 2008 28068693 1343492 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Wed Jul 23 11:15:35 -0700 2008 Wed Jul 23 11:15:38 -0700 2008 25326047 1180380 848635 0465083269 9780465083268 3 <![CDATA[Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-wing Courts Are Wrong for America]]> http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934m/848635.jpg http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178879934s/848635.jpg http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/848635.Radicals_in_Robes_Why_Extreme_Right_wing_Courts_Are_Wrong_for_America 3.67 18 Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America, he outlines four approaches that have long dominated constitutional debate--perfectionism, majoritarianism, minimalism, and fundamentalism--and argues for minimalism and against fundamentalism (perfectionism and majoritarianism are given less attention since they have largely fallen out of favor in recent decades). Minimalists believe in narrow, incremental decisions rather than broad rulings. They respect precedent, recognize the limited role of the judiciary, and "seek outcomes on which people with varying views can agree." Fundamentalists believe the Constitution must be interpreted according to "original understanding," or precisely what was meant at the time of ratification. "In the abstract, fundamentalism appears both principled and neutral. But too much of the time, fundamentalists offer an unmistakably partisan vision of the Constitution," he asserts. Though he acknowledges that fundamentalism can sometimes be reasonable, the risks of abuse are too great, leading him to conclude that the approach is "destructive and pernicious" because it leads to less freedom for Americans. In practice, for instance, it could ban the sale of contraceptives, invalidate most environmental regulations, allow discrimination on the basis of race and sex, allow states to establish official churches, and overturn even modest gun control laws.

]]> 2005 0 0 false Tue Jun 24 11:49:48 -0700 2008 Tue Jun 24 11:49:48 -0700 2008 8 http://www.goodreads.com/book_link/follow/8?book_id=848635