Is the Constitution whatever the winners say it is? / Gerard V. Bradley -- Nationhood and judicial supremacy / Robert F. Nagel -- Casey at the bat--taking another swing at Planned Parenthood v. Casey / Michael Zuckert -- Antijural jurisprudence : the vices of the judges enter a new stage / Hadley Arkes -- Judicial power and the withering of civil society / George W. Liebmann -- The academy, the courts, and the culture of rationalism / Steven D. Smith -- Judicial moral expertise and real-world constraints on judicial moral reasoning / Jack Wade Nowlin -- Toward a more balanced history of the Supreme Court / Michael W. McConnell -- Judicial review and republican government / Jeremy Waldron -- The Casey Five versus the Federalism Five : supreme legislator or prudent umpire? / Keith E. Whittington -- The Rhenquist Court and "conservative judicial activism" / Christopher Wolfe
Summary
The role of the United States Supreme Court has been deeply controversial throughout American history. Should the Court undertake the task of guarding a wide variety of controversial and often unenumerated rights? Or should it confine itself to enforcing specific constitutional provisions, leaving other issues (even those of rights) to the democratic process?