Introduction
Introduction
In Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall justified the judiciary's exercising the authority to disregard a statutory command when, in the judges' opinion, that command contravenes the Constitution of the United States. Marshall believed that the practice of judicial review rests not only on the structural features of the U.S. Constitution, but flows as well from the judge's individual obligations as a moral actor. One hundred ninety-nine years later, however, Richard A. Posner implied that a judge has no kind of moral or even political duty to abide by constitutional text. This book explores the debate about judicial review and argues that the key to understanding the moral dimension of constitutional decision is the demand it places on the conscience of the judge. It discusses what the author believes to be the most salient features of the moral circumstances in which a Supreme Court justice finds him- or herself when called upon to make a constitutional decision. Finally, the book examines whether American constitutionalism is a good idea.
Keywords: Marbury v. Madison, John Marshall, Supreme Court, judicial review, Richard A. Posner, Constitution, conscience, constitutional decision, constitutionalism, judges
Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
