Since it first appeared in 1960, The Supreme Court Review (SCR) has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists. This year's volume features prominent scholars assessing major legal events, including: Mark Tushnet on President Trump's "Muslim Ban" Kate Andrias on Union Fees in the Public Sector Cass R. Sunstein on Chevron without Chevron Tracey Maclin on the Fourth Amendment and Unauthorized Drivers Frederick Schauer on Precedent Pamela Karlan on Gay Equality and Racial Equality Randall Kennedy on Palmer v. Thompson Lisa Marshall Manheim and Elizabeth G. Porter on Voter Suppression Melissa Murray on Masterpiece Cakeshop Vikram David Amar on Commandeering Laura K. Donohue on Carpenter, Precedent, and Originalism Evan Caminker on Carpenter and Stability

For more than fifty years, The Supreme Court Review has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. The Supreme Court Review is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. It is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.

From 1953 to 1969, the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren brought about many of the proudest achievements of American constitutional law. The Warren declared racial segregation and laws forbidding interracial marriage to be unconstitutional; it expanded the right of citizens to criticize public officials; it held school prayer unconstitutional; and it ruled that people accused of a crime must be given a lawyer even if they can't afford one. Yet, despite those and other achievements, conservative critics have fiercely accused the justices of the Warren Court of abusing their authority by supposedly imposing their own opinions on the nation. As the eminent legal scholars Geoffrey R. Stone and David A. Strauss demonstrate in Democracy and Equality, the Warren Court's approach to the Constitution was consistent with the most basic values of our Constitution and with the most fundamental responsibilities of our judiciary. Stone and Strauss describer the Warren Court's extraordinary achievements by reviewing its jurisprudence across a range of issues addressing our nation's commitment to the values of democracy and equality. In each chapter, they tell the story of a critical decision, exploring the historical and legal context of each case, the Court's reasoning, and how the justices of the Warren Court fulfilled the Court's most important responsibilities. This powerfully argued evaluation of the Warren Court's legacy, in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the end of the Warren Court, both celebrates and defends the Warren Court's achievements against almost sixty-five years of unrelenting and unwarranted attacks by conservatives. It demonstrates not only why the Warren Court's approach to constitutional interpretation was correct and admirable, but also why the approach of the Warren Court was far superior to that of the increasingly conservative justices who have dominated the Supreme Court over the past half-century.

Since it first appeared in 1960, The Supreme Court Review (SCR) has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists. This year's volume features incisive assessments of major legal events, including: Gillian E. Metzger on The Roberts Court's Administrative Law Paul Butler on Peremptory Strikes in Mississippi v. Flowers Nicholas O. Stephanopoulos on Partisan Gerrymandering Kent Greenfield on Hate Speech Jennifer M. Chacon on Department of Commerce v. New York Micah Schwartzman & Nelson Tebbe on Establishment Clause Appeasement William Baude on Precedent and Originalism Linda Greenhouse on The Supreme Court's Challenge to Civil Society James T. Kloppenberg on James Madison

For more than fifty years, The Supreme Court Review has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. The Supreme Court Review is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. It is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.

Since it first appeared in 1960, The Supreme Court Review (SCR) has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists. This year's volume features incisive assessments of major legal events, including: Cristina M. Rodriguez on the Political Significance of Law Martha Minow on Little Sisters of the Poor Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule on the Unitary Executive Cary Franklin on Living Textualism David A. Strauss on Sexual Orientation and the Dynamics of Discrimination Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash on the Executive's Privileges and Immunities Reva B. Siegel on Abortion Restrictions Maggie Blackhawk on McGirt v. Oklahoma Richard J. Lazarus on Advocacy History

The latest volume in the Supreme Court Review series. Since it first appeared in 1960, the Supreme Court Review has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, analyzing the origins, reforms, and modern interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.