Academe vs. the Founding Fathers

Berger, Raoul
April 1978
National Review;4/14/1978, Vol. 30 Issue 15, p468
The article comments on the author's critics who attacked the issue he raised in his book about the court's perceived usurpation of general governmental powers. The author questions the power of courts to act as an instrument of revolution. This has been severely criticized by the academicians who defend the role of courts. Professor Arthur S. Miller accuses the author of viewing the Constitution narrowly. According to him, interpretation of the Constitution in the same manner as a contract or even statute is to demean it as the fundamental law. The author clarifies critic's interpretations. The reasons for the judicial fabrication of the court's political influence has been examined.


Related Articles

  • Court reins in solicitation laws.  // Body Politic;Nov79, Issue 58, p18 

    Reports that the California Supreme Court has declared that the state's sexual solicitation statute, a law used by police officers to entrap gays, does not meet constitutional standards of specificity as of November 1979. Details of a case which addressed the provisions of the sexual...

  • CONSTRUING THE TEXT OF CONSTITUTIONS AND STATUES. Taylor, Clifford W. // Texas Review of Law & Politics;Spring2004, Vol. 8 Issue 2, p365 

    Interprets the text of constitutions and statutes. Scope of judicial review; Assessment of problem of reconciling judicial review; Grounds for determining constitutionality.

  • How Courts Interpret Regulations. Newman, Frank C. // California Law Review;Dec47, Vol. 35 Issue 4, p509 

    Deals with the interpretation of regulations by courts in the U.S. Reason regulations need interpretation; Consideration of the ambiguities that have raised legal issues; Outline of the interpretive difficulties that have often been outlined for statutes, contracts and other legal writings for...

  • LEGAL LANDSCAPE.  // Iceland Country Profile;Oct2008, p61 

    The legal system of Iceland has been derived from its own constitution with an influence of Danish law. The Constitution Act is the highest national legal authority. Judiciary is independent of the government in Iceland. The Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal and is followed by several...

  • CONSTITUTIONALISING CAPITAL CRIMES: JUDICIAL VIRTUE OR 'ORIGINALISM' SIN? Yap Po Jen // Singapore Journal of Legal Studies;Jul2011, p281 

    The article discusses the argument on the stand of the Singapore Court of Appeal on the Yong Vui Kong v Public Prosecutor for the intended discernment of Framers' intent when understanding the Constitution of the country, and its comparative reasoning in constitutional adjudication. It states...

  • WHEN LIGHTNING STRIKES BACK: SOUTH CAROLINA'S RETURN TO THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, STANDARDLESS CAPITAL SENTENCING REGIME OF THE PREFURMAN ERA. Blume, John H.; Johnson, Sheri L.; Paavola, Emily C.; Weyble, Keir M. // Charleston Law Review;Spring2010, Vol. 4 Issue 3, p479 

    The article discusses the transformation of death penalty law in South Carolina. It offers an overview of the legislative and judicial development of the capital sentencing statute in the state. It explores the failure of the state's Supreme Court to comply with its statutory and constitutional...

  • Role of the General Principles of Islamic Law In the Contemporary International Law. Allam, Wael // Journal of Law / Magallat al-Huquq;Jun2014, Vol. 38 Issue 2, p37 

    According to article 38 (paragraph 1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, one of the main sources of public international law is the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. General principles of law recognized by civilized nations include legal principles...

  • THE SUPREME COURT'S BIPOLAR APPROACH TO THE INTERPRETATION OF 18 U.S.C. � 1503 AND 18 U.S.C. � 2232(c). Fitzpatrick, James K. // Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology;Summer96, Vol. 86 Issue 4, p1383 

    The article focuses on the court case United States v. Aguilar, where a Supreme Court in the United States ruled on questions regarding limits of the Omnibus Clause of 18 U.S.C. � 1503 and 18 U.S.C. � 2232(c). The former prohibits a person from endeavoring to obstruct or impede the due...

  • Internet Solutions v. Marshall: The Overreach of Florida's Long-Arm. Steinberger, Michael k. // University of Miami Law Review;Summer2012, Vol. 66 Issue 4, p1089 

    In this article, the author discusses the decision of the Florida Supreme Court regarding the case Internet Solutions v. Marshall. According to him, the court relied on flawed reasoning in reaching the decision. He examines the defects in the court's interpretation of its state's longarm statute...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics