Supreme Court book review

This is a pretty interesting thesis.

He sees the justices and the people as partners in a “marriage” that bypasses the elected legislature and the president. “It frequently is the case that when judges rely on the Constitution to invalidate the actions of the other branches of government, they are enforcing the will of the American people,” he says. The marriage between the court and the people, like many enduring ones, has gradually mellowed. At first, there were occasions when the two sides clashed mightily, but over the years they’ve learned to come into equilibrium. These days, when the court gets into trouble with the public, it’s often on an issue it’s confronting for the first time. (The eminent domain case Kelo v. City of New London, for instance, provoked a populist outcry in 2005.) “What history shows,” Friedman argues, “is assuredly not that Supreme Court decisions always are in line with popular opinion, but rather that they come into line with one another over time.” More...