Preface 1. The Supreme Court, 1935 -1953 I. Beginnings: The 1953 -1956 Terms Prologue: Brown before Warren 2. Brown 3. Implementation 4. Domestic Security 5. Glimpses of the Future II. Stalemate: The 1957 -1961 Terms Prologue: "Dangerously, Shockingly Close" 6. Domestic Security after Red Monday 7. Little Rock and Civil Rights 8. The Transition III. History's Warren Court: The 1962 -1968 Terms Prologue: The Fifth Vote 9. To the Civil Rights Act 10. Revamping the Democratic Process 11. After the Civil Rights Act 12. Freedom of Expression 13. The End of Obscenity? 14. Church and State in a Pluralist Society 15. Policing the Police 16. Policing the Criminal Justice System 17. Wealth and Poverty IV. The Era Ends Prologue: Retirement 18. The Last Year 19. What Was the Warren Court? Chronology Notes Bibliography Index of Cases General Index
Professor Powe has written a masterful book, the best on the Supreme Court in a generation. Not only will it be seen as a definitive account of the Warren Court, but it will also be viewed as a seminal work on the U. S. Supreme Court. With this work, Powe stakes a powerful claim to be seen as the heir to Robert McCloskey. Powe has written in the best tradition of works at the intersection of law, political science, and history. Decision making in the Supreme Court depends on law, attitudes, personalities, contexts, and sometimes fortune. This book demonstrates this in a way that will seem exactly right to most students of the Court. Not since Walter Murphy's classic Elements of Judicial Strategy have we had a book that does this so elegantly and persuasively. -- H. W. Perry, author of Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in theUnited States Supreme Court Professor Powe, demonstrating total control of the legal and historical materials, illuminates how the Warren Court was deeply embedded in the culture and politics of its time, particularly the Kennedy-Johnson liberalism of the mid and late 1960s. In doing so, he has resuscitated a neglected and valuable tradition of the institutional analysis of public law and given us a deeper understanding of what lies ahead for America in the new millennium. -- Mark Yudof, University of Minnesota Writing accessibly, and often irreverently, Powe locates the Warren Court within the major political movements of the era and convincingly refutes the notion that the Court was a forum of principle that ignored the political world outside its marble palace. Although there will undoubtedly be other treatments of the Court, Powe's ambitious and comprehensive survey establishes a very high threshold for any future historians to meet. -- Sanford Levinson, author of Written in Stone: Public Monuments inChanging Societies This book makes an important contribution to our understanding of the Warren Court. Numerous scholars have asserted that Earl Warren and his fellow justices were deeply involved in politics and mindful of changing political currents, but L. A. Powe is the first to have demonstrated detailed connections between the legal opinions issued by Warren Court justices and contemporaneous political arguments made by members of Congress and the Executive branches. The Warren Court and American Politics represents a skillful blending of the techniques and concerns of legal scholars and political scientists, combined in a lively, at times riveting, narrative. -- G. Edward White, University of Virginia School of Law Finally we have a comprehensive, readable, and clear-headed history of the Warren Court. This book is not only essential but absolutely required reading for everyone interested in American constitutional history, politics, and law. -- Stephen M. Griffin, Tulane Law School Powe has revived an honorable genre--the study of the Supreme Court as a political institution--a field once graced by the likes of E. S. Corwin, Alpheus Mason, and Walter Murphy. Powe reminds us that the Court is a political institution, one of three branches of government, and as such can only be understood in the larger context of American politics. The book is a tour de force, brimming with insights and elegantly written. He reminds us all of what political science once was, and what it could be again. -- Melvin I. Urofsky, Virginia Commonwealth University
Lucas A. Powe, Jr. holds the Anne Green Regents Chair at the University of Texas, where he teaches in the School of Law and the Department of Government.
Mr. Powe describes himself as someone who 'worshipped' the Warren
Court. Even so, he portrays it impartially as the super-legislature
it often resembled—an outcome-directed body that rarely worried
about constitutional theory or precedent… The court set into motion
a philosophy of political activism—heedless of constitutional
doctrine—that has become, for many judges ever since, almost a way
of life. This cannot be a good thing, however much we might applaud
some of the Warren court's rulings or the good intentions that lay
behind them. Admirably, especially for someone still enthralled by
the Warren Court, Mr. Powe seems to recognize this.
*Wall Street Journal*
[Powe's] book would be of considerable interest to students of the
judiciary even if its sole virtue were the deftness with which Powe
organizes and analyzes the unusually large number of important
decisions that the Supreme Court rendered during the controversial
tenure of Chief Justice Earl Warren. In this respect, Powe is
deserving of comparison to such eminent chroniclers of the Court's
history as Henry Abraham, Alfred Kelly, and Winfred Harbison. The
book's purpose, however, is as ambitious as its scope… A
comprehensive (and accessible) history of the Warren Court.
*Jurist: Books-on-Law*
An intriguing…history of the path-breaking, even revolutionary,
court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in the 1950s and 1960s.
Rarely for a constitutional scholar, Powe places the Warren court's
most famous cases in their political context…[in] a colorful tale.
The liberal Warren court's decisions on race, crime, religion, free
speech and obscenity startled, delighted or outraged contemporaries
and had a far-reaching impact on American politics and society.
*The Economist*
In an important book, Lucas A. Powe, Jr. argues that the familiar
debate about the merits of the Warren Court is, in fact, wrong. Far
from being a group of liberal judicial activists who imposed their
views on an unwilling nation, Powe argues, the Warren Court was,
for much of its tenure, remarkably deferential to the political
branches… Powe persuasively argues that the most important decision
of…[the Warren Court] can be justified as an effort to unclog,
rather than to thwart, the expression of majority will.
*New Republic*
A thorough and enlightening [read].
*Booklist*
Professor Powe has written a masterful book, the best on the
Supreme Court in a generation. Not only will it be seen as a
definitive account of the Warren Court, but it will also be viewed
as a seminal work on the U.S. Supreme Court. With this work, Powe
stakes a powerful claim to be seen as the heir to Robert McCloskey.
Powe has written in the best tradition of works at the intersection
of law, political science, and history. Decision making in the
Supreme Court depends on law, attitudes, personalities, contexts,
and sometimes fortune. This book demonstrates this in a way that
will seem exactly right to most students of the Court. Not since
Walter Murphy's classic Elements of Judicial Strategy have we had a
book that does this so elegantly and persuasively.
*H. W. Perry, author of Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in
the United States Supreme Court*
Professor Powe, demonstrating total control of the legal and
historical materials, illuminates how the Warren Court was deeply
embedded in the culture and politics of its time, particularly the
Kennedy–Johnson liberalism of the mid and late 1960s. In doing so,
he has resuscitated a neglected and valuable tradition of the
institutional analysis of public law and given us a deeper
understanding of what lies ahead for America in the new
millennium.
*Mark Yudof, University of Minnesota*
Writing accessibly, and often irreverently, Powe locates the Warren
Court within the major political movements of the era and
convincingly refutes the notion that the Court was a forum of
principle that ignored the political world outside its marble
palace. Although there will undoubtedly be other treatments of the
Court, Powe's ambitious and comprehensive survey establishes a very
high threshold for any future historians to meet.
*Sanford Levinson, author of Written in Stone: Public Monuments
in Changing Societies*
This book makes an important contribution to our understanding of
the Warren Court. Numerous scholars have asserted that Earl Warren
and his fellow justices were deeply involved in politics and
mindful of changing political currents, but L.A. Powe is the first
to have demonstrated detailed connections between the legal
opinions issued by Warren Court justices and contemporaneous
political arguments made by members of Congress and the Executive
branches. The Warren Court and American Politics represents a
skillful blending of the techniques and concerns of legal scholars
and political scientists, combined in a lively, at times riveting,
narrative.
*G. Edward White, University of Virginia School of Law*
Finally we have a comprehensive, readable, and clear-headed history
of the Warren Court. This book is not only essential but absolutely
required reading for everyone interested in American constitutional
history, politics, and law.
*Stephen M. Griffin, Tulane Law School*
Powe has revived an honorable genre—the study of the Supreme Court
as a political institution—a field once graced by the likes of E.S.
Corwin, Alpheus Mason, and Walter Murphy. Powe reminds us that the
Court is a political institution, one of three branches of
government, and as such can only be understood in the larger
context of American politics. The book is a tour de force, brimming
with insights and elegantly written. He reminds us all of what
political science once was, and what it could be again.
*Melvin I. Urofsky, Virginia Commonwealth University*
Purely legal analysis emphasizes the logical links, or absence of
them, between the questions raised in two or more cases and the
answers given to them. Purely political analysis relies on social
history as an explanation for judicial decisions. A more complete
picture results, as Powe argues, from a combination of the two…
Powe has done his non-psychological homework, however, and he
presents new material resulting from research about Brennan, Tom
Clark, and Douglas…he suggests that the Court 'was not worrying
about Constitutional theory but rather reaching results that
conformed to the values that enjoyed significant national support
in the mid-1960s.' His well-researched and lively volume presents
strong evidence that he is correct.
*Journal of American History*
The Warren Court and American Politics is a spectacularly good
book. Written for an audience of educated non-lawyers, it provides
the best available account of the relationship between the Warren
Court's liberalism and American politics during the entire period
of Earl Warren's tenure… It retrieves the nearly forgotten period
of stalemate. Its argument that the South must be seen at the
center of the Warren Court's work in free speech, religion, and
criminal procedure illuminates the Court's enterprise better than
any other account of which I am aware.
*Texas Law Review*
Challenging the reigning consensus that the Warren Court
fundamentally protected minorities, this book examines the Supreme
Court in a wider political environment. Powe argues that the Court
was a functioning partner in Kennedy–Johnson liberalism and thus
helped impose national liberal-elite values on groups that were
outliers to that tradition.
*Law and Social Inquiry*
Mr. Powe describes himself as someone who 'worshipped' the Warren
Court. Even so, he portrays it impartially as the super-legislature
it often resembled-an outcome-directed body that rarely worried
about constitutional theory or precedent... The court set into
motion a philosophy of political activism-heedless of
constitutional doctrine-that has become, for many judges ever
since, almost a way of life. This cannot be a good thing, however
much we might applaud some of the Warren court's rulings or the
good intentions that lay behind them. Admirably, especially for
someone still enthralled by the Warren Court, Mr. Powe seems to
recognize this. -- Jay P. Lefkowitz * Wall Street Journal *
[Powe's] book would be of considerable interest to students of the
judiciary even if its sole virtue were the deftness with which Powe
organizes and analyzes the unusually large number of important
decisions that the Supreme Court rendered during the controversial
tenure of Chief Justice Earl Warren. In this respect, Powe is
deserving of comparison to such eminent chroniclers of the Court's
history as Henry Abraham, Alfred Kelly, and Winfred Harbison. The
book's purpose, however, is as ambitious as its scope... A
comprehensive (and accessible) history of the Warren Court. --
Jeffrey D. Hockett * Jurist: Books-on-Law *
An intriguing...history of the path-breaking, even revolutionary,
court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in the 1950s and 1960s.
Rarely for a constitutional scholar, Powe places the Warren court's
most famous cases in their political context...[in] a colorful
tale. The liberal Warren court's decisions on race, crime,
religion, free speech and obscenity startled, delighted or outraged
contemporaries and had a far-reaching impact on American politics
and society. * The Economist *
In an important book, Lucas A. Powe, Jr. argues that the familiar
debate about the merits of the Warren Court is, in fact, wrong. Far
from being a group of liberal judicial activists who imposed their
views on an unwilling nation, Powe argues, the Warren Court was,
for much of its tenure, remarkably deferential to the political
branches... Powe persuasively argues that the most important
decision of...[the Warren Court] can be justified as an effort to
unclog, rather than to thwart, the expression of majority will. --
Jeffrey Rosen * New Republic *
A thorough and enlightening [read]. -- Mary Carroll * Booklist
*
Professor Powe has written a masterful book, the best on the
Supreme Court in a generation. Not only will it be seen as a
definitive account of the Warren Court, but it will also be viewed
as a seminal work on the U.S. Supreme Court. With this work, Powe
stakes a powerful claim to be seen as the heir to Robert McCloskey.
Powe has written in the best tradition of works at the intersection
of law, political science, and history. Decision making in the
Supreme Court depends on law, attitudes, personalities, contexts,
and sometimes fortune. This book demonstrates this in a way that
will seem exactly right to most students of the Court. Not since
Walter Murphy's classic Elements of Judicial Strategy have
we had a book that does this so elegantly and persuasively. -- H.
W. Perry, author of Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the
United States Supreme Court
Professor Powe, demonstrating total control of the legal and
historical materials, illuminates how the Warren Court was deeply
embedded in the culture and politics of its time, particularly the
Kennedy-Johnson liberalism of the mid and late 1960s. In doing so,
he has resuscitated a neglected and valuable tradition of the
institutional analysis of public law and given us a deeper
understanding of what lies ahead for America in the new millennium.
-- Mark Yudof, University of Minnesota
Writing accessibly, and often irreverently, Powe locates the Warren
Court within the major political movements of the era and
convincingly refutes the notion that the Court was a forum of
principle that ignored the political world outside its marble
palace. Although there will undoubtedly be other treatments of the
Court, Powe's ambitious and comprehensive survey establishes a very
high threshold for any future historians to meet. -- Sanford
Levinson, author of Written in Stone: Public Monuments in
Changing Societies
This book makes an important contribution to our understanding of
the Warren Court. Numerous scholars have asserted that Earl Warren
and his fellow justices were deeply involved in politics and
mindful of changing political currents, but L.A. Powe is the first
to have demonstrated detailed connections between the legal
opinions issued by Warren Court justices and contemporaneous
political arguments made by members of Congress and the Executive
branches. The Warren Court and American Politics represents
a skillful blending of the techniques and concerns of legal
scholars and political scientists, combined in a lively, at times
riveting, narrative. -- G. Edward White, University of Virginia
School of Law
Finally we have a comprehensive, readable, and clear-headed history
of the Warren Court. This book is not only essential but absolutely
required reading for everyone interested in American constitutional
history, politics, and law. -- Stephen M. Griffin, Tulane Law
School
Powe has revived an honorable genre-the study of the Supreme Court
as a political institution-a field once graced by the likes of E.S.
Corwin, Alpheus Mason, and Walter Murphy. Powe reminds us that the
Court is a political institution, one of three branches of
government, and as such can only be understood in the larger
context of American politics. The book is a tour de force,
brimming with insights and elegantly written. He reminds us all of
what political science once was, and what it could be again. --
Melvin I. Urofsky, Virginia Commonwealth University
Purely legal analysis emphasizes the logical links, or absence of
them, between the questions raised in two or more cases and the
answers given to them. Purely political analysis relies on social
history as an explanation for judicial decisions. A more complete
picture results, as Powe argues, from a combination of the two...
Powe has done his non-psychological homework, however, and he
presents new material resulting from research about Brennan, Tom
Clark, and Douglas...he suggests that the Court 'was not worrying
about Constitutional theory but rather reaching results that
conformed to the values that enjoyed significant national support
in the mid-1960s.' His well-researched and lively volume presents
strong evidence that he is correct. -- Philippa Strum * Journal of
American History *
The Warren Court and American Politics is a spectacularly
good book. Written for an audience of educated non-lawyers, it
provides the best available account of the relationship between the
Warren Court's liberalism and American politics during the entire
period of Earl Warren's tenure... It retrieves the nearly forgotten
period of stalemate. Its argument that the South must be seen at
the center of the Warren Court's work in free speech, religion, and
criminal procedure illuminates the Court's enterprise better than
any other account of which I am aware. -- Mark V. Tushnet * Texas
Law Review *
Challenging the reigning consensus that the Warren Court
fundamentally protected minorities, this book examines the Supreme
Court in a wider political environment. Powe argues that the Court
was a functioning partner in Kennedy-Johnson liberalism and thus
helped impose national liberal-elite values on groups that were
outliers to that tradition. * Law and Social Inquiry *
|
Ask a Question About this Product More... |
|
