Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:44:33.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Brown Teaches Us About the Rehnquist Court's Federalism Revival

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2004

Neal Devins
Neal Devins
Affiliation:
College of William and Mary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 211 - 214
Copyright
© 2004 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bickel Alexander M. 1962 The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Brudney James J., and Ruth Colker. 2001 “Dissing Congress.” Michigan Law Review, 100: 80.Google Scholar
Devins Neal 2001 “Congress as Culprit: How Lawmakers Spurned on the Court's Antit-Congress Crusade.” Duke Law Journal 51: 435.Google Scholar
Devins Neal. 2002 “The Federalism-Rights Nexus: Explaining Why Senate Democrats Can Tolerate Rehnquist Court Decisionmaking but not the Rehnquist Court.” University of Colorado Law Review 73: 1307.Google Scholar
Douglas William O. 1980 The Court Years. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Dudziak Mary. 2000 Cold War Civil Rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Erskine Hazel Gaudet. 1962 “The Polls: Race Relations.” Public Opinion Quarterly 26: 137.Google Scholar
Gewirtz Paul. 1983 “Remedies and Resistance.” Yale Law Journal 92: 585.Google Scholar
Greenberg Jack. 1994 Crusaders in the Courts. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hutchinson Dennis J. 1979 “Unanimity and Desegregation: Decisionmaking in the Supreme Court, 1948–1958.” The Georgetown Law Journal 68: 1.Google Scholar
Klarman Michael J. 1994 “Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement.” Virginia Law Review 80: 7.Google Scholar
Klinker Philip A., with Rogers Smith. 1999 The Unsteady March. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klarman Michael J. 1996 “Rethinking the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Revolution.” Virginia Law Review 82: 1.Google Scholar
Kluger Richard. 1975 Simple Justice. New York: Alfred A. Kropf.Google Scholar
McGinnis John O. 2002 “Reviving Tocqueville's America: The Rehnquist Court's Jurisprudence of Social Discovery.” California Law Review 90: 485.Google Scholar
Memorandum of William O. Douglas. Jan. 25, 1960 In The Douglas Letters: Selections from the Private Papers of Justice William O. Douglas, ed. Melvin I. Urofsky. 1987. Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler.Google Scholar
Merrill Thomas W. 2003 “The Making of the Second Rehnquist Court: A Preliminary Analysis.” St. Louis University Law Journal 47: 569.Google Scholar
Nomination of Judge Sandra Day O'Connor of Arizona to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. 1981 Hearings before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 97th Cong. 1st Sess. 59.Google Scholar
Patterson James T. 2001 Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and its Troubled Legacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schroeder Christopher H. 2001 “Causes of the Recent Trend on Constitutional Interpretation.” Duke Law Journal 51: 307.Google Scholar
Skrentny John David. 1996 The Ironies of Affirmative Action. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sweatt v. Painter. 1950 1950. 339 U.S. 629.Google Scholar
Tushnet Mark V. 1987 The NAACP's Legal Strategy Against Segregated Education. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Wermiel Stephen J. 1993 “Confirming the Constitution: The Role of the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Law and Contemporary Problems 56 (Autumn): 121.Google Scholar
Whittington Keith E. 2001 “Taking What They Give Us: Explaining the Court's Federalism Offensive.” Duke Law Journal 51: 477.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. 1954 347 U.S. 483.Google Scholar
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. 1955 349 U.S. 294.Google Scholar
Cooper v. Aaron. 1958 358 U.S. 1.Google Scholar
Green v. County School Board of New Kent. 1968 391 U.S. 430.Google Scholar
Planned Parenthood v. Casey. 1992 505 U.S. 833.Google Scholar
Roe v. Wade. 1973 410 U.S. 113.Google Scholar
United States v. Lopez. 1995 514 U.S. 549.Google Scholar