gutzmankThat is definitely a book to avoid.
The Supreme Court follows neither original understanding (that is, the people’s will) nor current preferences. Across a range of issues, what they do is instantiate the will of the Harvard Law/Yale Law mandarinate upon us via “constitutional law” rulings.
Take forced busing. The public never supported it, yet it was imposed upon the people of many areas of the country for three decades. Consider the ruling that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment established a right to burn a flag enforceable by federal courts against state governments. There never was a time when anything near a majority favored such a fatuous declaration, yet it can’t be undone. Think about the 1962 decision that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment banned states from requiring that students in public schools say an anodyne prayer each morning. 49 governors protested, and 70% of Americans still oppose it, yet it cannot be repealed. Think of the Supreme Court’s declaration a couple of years ago that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment means that you have a right to rape a child in America without receiving the death penalty. Like the others, this absurdity is unfounded in either original understanding or current public opinion.
I could go on and on and on. The bottom line is that where formerly they simply called for federal courts to write their opinions into law, liberals in the legal establishments today justify this idea with the assertion that whatever they do, federal judges are pretty close to average Americans’ opinions. It couldn’t be further from the truth. For the whole sordid story, please consider my THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION.