JOHNATHAN O'NEILL. Originalism in American Law and Politics: A Constitutional History. (Johns Hopkins Series in Constitutional Thought.) Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2005. Pp. x, 281. $55.00

2006 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 876-877
Author(s):  
K. E. Whittington
2006 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 337
Author(s):  
Dennis J. Goldford ◽  
Johnathan O'Neill

Author(s):  
Mark Golub

This concluding chapter considers the implications of the book’s central claims: that constitutional law marks a contested site of racial formation, that color-blind constitutionalism represents an assertion of white racial interest and identity, and that the peculiar form of racial consciousness it enacts renders the pursuit of racial equality a violation of white rights. Taking up the question of political possibility within a legal system constituted by racial domination, the chapter suggests that racial equality may not be achievable within the current American constitutional order. It calls for a rethinking of American law and politics from the premise that racial equality will require a more fundamental transformation than these constraints would permit, and points toward an explicitly antiredemptive political vision upon which a more authentic racial democracy might be founded.


2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (04) ◽  
pp. 1698-1728 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Southworth

What roles have lawyers played in the conservative counterrevolution in US law and public policy? Two recent books, Jefferson Decker's The Other Rights Revolution: Conservative Lawyers and the Remaking of American Government (2016), and Amanda Hollis-Brusky's Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution (2015), speak to the question. This essay explores how these books relate to a larger story of the conservative legal movement and the roles that lawyers and their organizations and networks have played in the conservative turn in American law and politics. It highlights four interrelated threads of the movement's development: creating a support structure for conservative legal advocacy; remaking the judiciary and holding judges accountable; generating, legitimizing, and disseminating ideas to support legal change; and embracing legal activism to roll back government. The essay then considers a continuing challenge for the movement: managing tensions among its several constituencies. Finally, it suggests how this story has played out in litigation to challenge campaign finance regulation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document