The Political Dynamics of Justice Reform in The U.S.

I. Introduction
The Politics of Justice
The Economist | Sep 4th 1997
Striking the right balance between constitutional rigidity and political flexibility is the
great challenge for a supreme court
The United States Supreme
Court is the most paradoxical of
government institutions. Its rulings
are studied by judges and lawyers
in many countries, and so have
considerable influence beyond
America's borders. Yet all other
democracies have shrunk with
distaste from the idea of giving their
supreme courts the same sweeping
powers as America's.
In the United States itself, the
Supreme Court's proper role has
always been a subject of hot
debate. Yet it probably commands
more public respect than either of
the other arms of government: the
presidency and the Congress.
Though many people vehemently
disagree with particular decisions
of the court, its legal power to strike
down state or federal laws, to
arbitrate disputes between the
president and Congress, and
between either of them and the
states, remains unchallenged.
Throughout American history, many of the country's best minds have devoted
themselves to puzzling over these paradoxes, and arguing about how the court should
go about its business. Each of these books casts light on that continuing debate.
Antonin Scalia's serves as a crash course in the subject. Since his appointment to the
Supreme Court in 1986, he has argued against what he sees as unwarranted judicial
activism. In his view, since the early 1950s the court has regularly overstepped the
boundary between adjudicating and legislating. Too often, he complains, the court's
Page 19 of 262