U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s

Autor

  • Carlos Figueroa Ithaca College, Politics Department, School of Humanities and Sciences

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.21.4.06

Słowa kluczowe:

educative court, deliberative democracy, judicial review, U.S. Supreme Court, ethical responsibility

Abstrakt

This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s lesser-known educative role as an egalitarian institution within a broader deliberative democratic process. Scholars have argued that the Court’s long asserted power of judicial review, especially in the equal protection and civil rights context, has been an over-reach of the judicial branch’s constitutional authority and responsibilities. Normative and empirical critiques have been centered on the aims of judicial review, and the challenges it poses in American political life. A core issue surrounding these critiques is that Justices are appointed not elected, and thus undermine the principle of majority rule in the U.S. constitutional democratic order. Although these critiques are legitimate in terms of claims about unelected Supreme Court Justices’ seemingly discretionary powers over elected legislative bodies, and the uncertain policy implications of judicial pronouncements on the broader society, there is, nevertheless, a positive application of judicial review as a tool Justices use as part of their educative role overcoming the so-called “counter-majoritarian difficulty.” Through a close reading of oral arguments in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez (1973)—two landmark cases invoking the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution—the article shows how appointed Justices adjudicate individual cases on appeal and attempt to educate (through an argumentative, reason-based and question-centered process) citizenlitigants and their legal representatives about the importance of equality, fairness and ethical responsibility even prior to rendering final decisions on policy controversies that have broader national social, political and economic implications.

Bibliografia

Abraham, H. J. (1994). The judiciary: The Supreme Court in the governmental process (9th Ed.). Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark Publishers.
Google Scholar

Abraham, H. J., & Perry, B. A. (2003). Freedom & The Court: Civil rights and liberties in the United States (8th Ed). Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.
Google Scholar

Ackerman, B. (1991). We the People foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Araiza, W., Haddon, P. A., & Roberts, D. E. (2006). Constitutional law: Cases, history, and dialogues. LexisNexis.
Google Scholar

Besson, S., & Marti, J. L. (Eds.) (2006). Deliberative democracy and its discontents. Aldershot, Burlington: Ashgate.
Google Scholar

Bickel, A. (1968). The least dangerous branch: The Supreme Court at the bar of politics (2nd Ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Google Scholar

Brennan, Jr., W. J. (1972). Inside view of the High Court. In L. W. Levy (Ed.), The Supreme Court under Earl Warren. New York, NY: Quadrangle Books.
Google Scholar

Brinkley, A. (1993). The affluent society, the unfinished nation: A concise history of the American people. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
Google Scholar

Brown v. Board of Education. (1954). 347 U.S. 483.
Google Scholar

Dahl, R. (1957). Decision-Making in a democracy: The Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. Journal of Public Law, 6(1957), 279–295.
Google Scholar

Davis, A. L., & Graham, B. L. (1995). The Supreme Court, race, and civil rights: From Marshall to Rehnquist. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar

Eisgruber, C. (1962). Is the Supreme Court an educative institution? New York University Law Review, 961(1962).
Google Scholar

Ely, J. H. (1980). Democracy and distrust: A theory of judicial review. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Epstein, L., Knight, J., & Martin, A. (2001). The Supreme Court as a strategic national policymaker. Emory Law Journal, 50, 583–611.
Google Scholar

Figueroa, C. (2014). Book Foreword (Politics). In T. Broadwick, You’re not listening and other plays (pp. ix-xi). Southlake, TX: Fountainhead Press.
Google Scholar

Fisher, L. (1999). American constitutional law (3rd Ed.). Durham, N.C.: Caroline Academic Press.
Google Scholar

Friedman, L. (1969). Argument: The oral argument before the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 1952–1955. New York, NY: Chelsea House Publishers.
Google Scholar

Frisch, M. J., & Stevens, R. G. (1973). Felix Frankfurter (1882–1965). The political thought of American statesmen: Selected writings and speeches. Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publishers.
Google Scholar

Funston, R. (1978). A vital national seminar: The Supreme Court in American political life. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Google Scholar

Gambitta, R. A. (1992). San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez. In K. L. Hall (Ed.) The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States (pp. 753–754). Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Gammon, T. E. (1977). Equal protection of the law and San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez. Valparaiso University Law Review, 11(3), 435–472.
Google Scholar

Goldstein, L. F. (1987). Judicial review and democratic theory: Guardian Democracy vs. Representative Democracy. Western Political Quarterly, 40(3), September, 391–412.
Google Scholar

Guitton, S., & Irons, P. (1993). May it please the court: The most significant oral arguments made before the Supreme Court since 1955. New York, NY: New Press.
Google Scholar

Hollinger, D. A. (1979). Historians and the discourse of intellectuals. In J. Higham, & P. K. Conkin (Eds.), New directions in American intellectual history (pp. 42–63). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar

Hugh, W. (2002). Five types of legal arguments. Durham, NC.
Google Scholar

Keynes, E. (1991). Democracy, judicial review, and the war powers. Undeclared war: Twilight zone of constitutional power. University Park, PA: Penn State Press.
Google Scholar

Kunsch, K. (1994). Standard of review (state and federal): A primer. Seattle University Law Review, 18(11), 11–49.
Google Scholar

Landynski, J. W. (1982). Fundamental Individual Rights and Public Policy in the New Supreme Court (The Annual Paley Lectures in American Civilization). Jerusalem: The Magnus Press, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Google Scholar

Landynski, J. W., & Padover, S. K. (1983). The living U.S. constitution (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: New American Library.
Google Scholar

Levinson, S. (2000). Preface to Third Edition. In R. G. McCloskey (Ed.). The American Supreme Court (pp. ix–xi). University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar

Marsh, D., Ercan, S. A., & Furlong, P. (2017). A skin, not a sweater: Ontology and epistemology in Political Science. In V. Lowndes, D. Marsh, & G. Stoker, Theory and methods in political science (4th Ed.) (pp. 177–198). London: Palgrave.
Google Scholar

Marti, J. L. (2017). Pluralism and consensus in deliberative democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 20(5), 556–579.
Google Scholar

McCloskey, R. (2000). American Supreme Court. University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar

Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(3), 745–758.
Google Scholar

Mouffe, C. (2005). The return of the political. London and New York: Verso Books.
Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. (2003). Constitutional Law and politics: Civil rights and liberties, (vol. 2, 5th Ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
Google Scholar

Perreti, T. J. (1999). Whither the court and constitution? In Defense of a Political Court (pp. 229–230). Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar

Powell, H. J. (1985). The original understanding of original intent. Harvard Law Review, 98(5), 885–948.
Google Scholar

Rakove, J. N. (1996). Original meanings: Politics and Ideas in the making of the constitution. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
Google Scholar

Rakove, J. N. (Eds.). (1990). Interpreting the constitution: The debate over original intent. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
Google Scholar

Reed, Jr., A. (2004). Beyond Black, White and Brown: A Forum. The Nation April 15.
Google Scholar

Report of the Study Group on the Caseload of the Supreme Court, 57 F.R.D. (1972), p. 573.
Google Scholar

Rosenberg, G. N. (1993). The hollow hope: Can courts bring about social change. University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar

Rostow, E. V. (1952). The democratic character of judicial review. Harvard Law Review, 66, 193–224.
Google Scholar

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez. (1973). 411 U.S. 1.
Google Scholar

Schmitter, P. C., & Lynn Karl, T. (1996). What democracy is... and is not. In L. Diamond & M. F. Plattner (Eds.), The global resurgence of democracy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar

Smith, R. M. (1997). Civic ideals: Conflicting visions of citizenship in U.S. history. Yale University Press.
Google Scholar

Sunstein, C. (1993). The partial constitution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar

Thayer, J. B. (1893). The origin and scope of the American doctrine of constitutional law. Harvard Law Review, 7(3), October 25, 130–156.
Google Scholar

The Philadelphia Inquirer. (1968, October 4).
Google Scholar

The Supreme Court of the United States, October 1971 Term, No. 71-1332, Red Books.
Google Scholar

Thompson, D. F. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497–520.
Google Scholar

Tushnet, M. (1999). Taking the constitution away from the courts. Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar

United States v. Carolene Products Co. (1939). 304 U.S. 144.
Google Scholar

Voeten, E. (2014, September 12). Judges as principled politicians. The Washington Post.
Google Scholar

Whittington, K. E. (2009). Political foundations of judicial supremacy: The presidency, the Supreme Court, and constitutional leadership in U.S. History. Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar

Zinn, H. (1995). A people’s history of the United States. New York: HarperCollins.
Google Scholar

##submission.downloads##

Opublikowane

2019-03-19

Jak cytować

Figueroa, C. (2019). U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s. Annales. Etyka W Życiu Gospodarczym, 21(4), 59-88. https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.21.4.06

Numer

Dział

Artykuł