Sullivan_Review
Reviews

Government by Judiciary

The two most prominent newspaper journalists covering the U.S. Supreme Court have written biographies of two of the most prominent justices of our time.  Predictably, Linda Greenhouse of the New York Times, who has written Becoming Justice Blackmun: Harry Blackmun’s Supreme Court Journey, and Joan Biskupic of USA Today, who recently published Sandra Day O’Connor: How the First Woman on the Supreme Court Became Its Most Influential Justice, are enthusiastic cheerleaders for the liberal social engineering of these jurists.  Predictably, too, Greenhouse and Biskupic, like the justices they lionize, care not at all about the original understanding of the Constitution.  Their books offer sympathetic portraits of policymakers using the “living” Constitution to subvert the historical Constitution in order to impose their vision of the good society on America.

To be sure, Greenhouse and Biskupic know the contemporary Court well.  They write of its current inner workings, personalities, and rituals with clarity and comprehensive knowledge.  They know nothing, however, of constitutional history and interpretation.  So long as the Court reaches results that comport with the secular-liberal worldview—particularly the feminist component of that worldview—then its decisions are, so far as Greenhouse and Biskupic are concerned,...

Join now to access the full article and gain access to other exclusive features.

Get Started

Already a member? Sign in here

X