A Court Divided; The Rehnquist Court and the Future of Constituionall Law

NY: Norton. VG HARDBACK. (2005). 1st ptg. Thorough investigation of the court system. Includes index. owner name front endpaper, Not only the liberals versus the . Conservatives but but between the modern Republican Party transformed by Goldwater and Reagan who rejected the prindiples that animate our government from the New Deal through the Great Society. The Court's liberals mostly sat on the sidelines happy to pick up the victories they could gain when the Court's Republicans divided.The justic are neither criminals nor heroes on wheher the U.S. is ready to descend intoyranny or acend into utopia. They are rather ordinary lawyers with strong views on wht the constitution means, shaped by their personal experience. Spome of them have quirks just like the rest of us but they are not pesonal spats We instead have to look at the history that gave rise to thmm and to the argument about what the Constitution means and see how competing visions play out in specific legal settings. It's not enough to be s conservative or a liberal although that's part of the story. The Court's division meant that they are trying to figure out what conservatism abaout what the Constituion really is. The Conservatives prevailed on issues asosicated with the Republican Party's effort to scale down the size of government while losing consistently on social issues - aobriotion, gay rights and affirmative action that animated an important part of the party's base although they didn't need much assistance. An important book. .