Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge's View

3,67 valoración promedio
( 452 valoraciones por Goodreads )
 
9780307390837: Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge's View

Charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the awesome power to strike down laws enacted by our elected representatives. Why does the public accept the Court’s decisions as legitimate and follow them, even when those decisions are highly unpopular? What must the Court do to maintain the public’s faith? How can it help make our democracy work?
 
In this groundbreaking book, Justice Stephen Breyer tackles these questions and more, offering an original approach to interpreting the Constitution that judges, lawyers, and scholars will look to for many years to come.

"Sinopsis" puede pertenecer a otra edición de este libro.

About the Author:

Stephen Breyer is an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. He is a resident of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Washington, D.C.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.:

Introduction

Day after day I see Americans—of every race, religion, nationality, and point of view—trying to resolve their differences in the courtroom. It has not always been so. In earlier times, both here and abroad, individuals and communities settled their differences not in courtrooms under law but on the streets with violence. We Americans treasure the customs and institutions that have helped us find the better way. And we not only hope but also believe that in the future we will continue to resolve disputes under law, just as surely as we will continue to hold elections for president and Congress. Our beliefs reflect the strength of our Constitution and the institutions it has created.

The Constitution’s form and language have helped it endure. The document is short—seven articles and twenty- seven amendments. It focuses primarily on our government’s structure. Its provisions form a simple coherent whole, permitting readers without technical knowledge to understand the document and the government it creates. And it traces the government’s authority directly to a single source of legitimizing power—“We the People.”

Words on paper, however, no matter how wise, are not sufficient to preserve a nation. Benjamin Franklin made this point when, in 1787, he told a Philadelphia questioner that the Constitutional Convention had created “a republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” The separate institutions that the Constitution fashioned—Congress, the executive, the judiciary—were intended to bring about a form of government that would guarantee that democracy and liberty are not empty promises. But what would enable the Constitution to work not only in theory but also in practice? How could the nation make sure that the Constitution’s limits are respected, that our citizens enjoy its important protections, that our legal system resolves disputes fairly and impartially, and that our courts dispense justice?

Alexander Hamilton, along with many of the other constitutional framers, thought that a Supreme Court would provide part of the
answer. The Court would interpret the law, thereby enforcing the Constitution’s limits. It would help ensure a democratic political system, and it would safeguard individual constitutional rights and liberties. Indeed, as the historian Gordon Wood has pointed out, “by protecting the rights of minorities of all sorts against popular majorities,” the Court would “become a major instrument for both curbing [American] democracy and maintaining it.”

In the framers’ eyes, then, the Court would help to maintain the workable democracy that the Constitution sought to create. I have previously written about the Court and democracy, explaining the ways in which that constitutional concept critically affects judicial interpretation of much of the Constitution’s language and also how the Constitution’s democratic objective assumes a public that actively participates in the nation’s political life. The present book focuses on the Supreme Court’s role in maintaining a workable constitutional system of government. It discusses how the public and the Court can help make the Constitution work well in practice. And it shows why the Constitution necessarily assumes that the typical American learns something of our nation’s history and understands how our government works.

In particular, this book considers two sets of questions. The first concerns the public’s willingness to accept the Court’s decisions as
legitimate. When the Court interprets the law, will the other branches of government follow those interpretations? Will the public do so? Will they implement even those Court decisions that they believe are wrong and that are highly unpopular? Many of us take for granted that the answer to these questions is yes, but this was not always the case. Part I uses examples from our nation’s history to show how, after fragile beginnings, the Court’s authority has grown. It describes how the Court was given the power to interpret the Constitution authoritatively, striking down congressional statutes that it finds in conflict with the Constitution. And it goes on to describe several instances where Supreme Court decisions were ignored or disobeyed, where the president’s or the public’s acceptance of Court decisions was seriously in doubt. These examples of the Court’s infirmity—perhaps startling today—demonstrate that public acceptance is not automatic and cannot be taken for granted. The Court itself must help maintain the public’s trust in the Court, the public’s confidence in the Constitution, and the public’s commitment to the rule of law.

Part II considers how the Court can carry out this constitutional responsibility. The key lies in the Court’s ability to apply the Constitution’s enduring values to changing circumstances. In carrying out this basic interpretive task, the Court must thoughtfully employ a set of traditional legal tools in service of a pragmatic approach to interpreting the law. It must understand that its actions have real-world consequences. And it must recognize and respect the roles of other governmental institutions. By taking account of its own experience and expertise as well as those of other institutions, the Court can help make the law work more effectively and thereby better achieve the Constitution’s basic objective of creating a workable democratic government. My argument in Part II takes the formof examples drawn fromhistory and from the present day, illustrating the Court’s relationships with Congress, the executive branch, the states, other courts, and earlier courts. Part of my aim is to show how the Court can build the necessary productive working relationships with other institutions—without abdicating its own role as constitutional guardian.

The Court’s role in protecting individual liberties presents special challenges to these relationships, some of which are discussed in Part III. I describe how this protection often involves a search for permanent values underlying particular constitutional phrases. I describe a method (proportionality) useful in applying those values to complex contemporary circumstances. And I discuss the Japanese internment during World War II as well as the recent Guantánamo cases to illustrate the difficulty of finding a proper balance between liberty and security when a president acts in time of war or special security need.

Throughout, I argue that the Court should interpret written words, whether in the Constitution or a statute, using traditional legal tools, such as text, history, tradition, precedent, and, particularly, purposes and related consequences, to help make the law effective. In this way, the Court can help maintain the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of its interpretive role.

The various approaches that I discuss in Parts II and III fit together. They constitute a set of pragmatic approaches to interpreting the law. They provide a general perspective of how a pragmatically oriented judge might go about deciding the kinds of cases that make up the work of the Supreme Court. I do not argue that judges should decide all legal cases pragmatically. But I also suggest that by understanding that its actions have real-world consequences and taking those consequences into account, the Court can help make the law work more effectively. It can thereby better achieve the Constitution’s basic objective of creating a workable democratic government. In this way the Court can help maintain the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of its interpretive role. This point, which returns full circle to Part I, is critical. At the end of the day, the public’s confidence is what permits the Court to ensure a Constitution that is more than words on paper. It is what enables the Court to ensure that the Constitution functions democratically, that it protects individual liberty, and that it works in practice for the benefit of all Americans. This book explores ways in which I believe the Court can maintain that confidence and thereby carry out its responsibility to help ensure a Constitution that endures.
Chapter Three

The Cherokees
Although Marbury gave the Court the power to refuse to apply an act of Congress on the ground that it violated the Constitution, the Court did not again exercise that power until its decision in the Dred Scott case more than fifty years later. This hesitancy to find a federal statute unconstitutional, like Marshall’s strategic view of Marbury, suggests a Court deeply uncertain as to whether the president, the Congress, or the public itself would accept the Court’s views about the Constitution—at least when they strongly disagreed with those views. And without assurance that other government officials and the public would follow the law, how could the Court successfully exercise its review power? How could it help to protect, say, an unpopular minority? How could it help make the Constitution more than words on paper?

Today judges from all over the world ask similar questions. A chief justice of an African nation struggling to maintain an independent judiciary recently asked me directly, “Why do Americans do what the courts say?” What in the Constitution makes this likely? What is the institutional device that makes court decisions effective? What, she wondered, is the secret? I answered that there is no secret; there are no magic words on paper. Following the law is a matter of custom, of habit, of widely shared understandings as to how those in government and members of the public should, and will, act when faced with a court decision they strongly dislike.

My short answer to the chief justice’s question was to say that history, not legal doctrine, tells us how Americans came to follow the
Supreme Court’s rulings. My longer answer consists of several examples that illustrate different challenges the Court and the nation faced as gradually, over time, the American public developed those customs and habits.

The Cherokee Indian cases of the 1830s provide an early example of enforceability put to the test. The Cherokee tribe sued to protect its legal rights to its ancestral lands in northern Georgia. The U.S. Supreme Court held in its favor. What happened next is an unhappy story.

In the first part of the nineteenth century, a dispute developed between the Cherokee Indians and their neighbors, settlers in the state of Georgia. The dispute was simple. The Indians owned land, rocks, and minerals that the white Georgia settlers wanted, and the Indians did not want to give them up. The Georgians had tried hard for two decades to convince three presidents (James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, and Andrew Jackson) to remove the Indian tribes from Georgia and send them to the West. But they got nowhere. Monroe, for example, told the Georgians that he would use only reasonable, peaceful means to convince the tribe to move.

The Cherokees, who had lived in northern Georgia far longer than the Georgians, had moved on from their purely hunting/fishing life to become farmers and landowners. They had developed an alphabet, established a printing press, and built a capital called New Echota. Under the leadership of their great chief John Ross, they had also adopted a constitution. They had no reason to leave their own land. And they told President Monroe that “it is the fixed and unalterable determination of this nation never again to cede one foot more of our land.” They added that they were not foreigners but the original inhabitants of America, who “now stand on the soil of their own territory” and who will not “recognize the sovereignty of any State within the limits of their territory.” And they would later tell President Andrew Jackson that when they moved, they would not go west but, instead, would only go “by the course of nature to sleep under this ground which the Great Spirit gave our ancestors.”

Then, in 1829, gold was found on the Cherokee lands, and the Georgians decided to break the stalemate. They entered the Cherokee territory and began to work the gold mines. They passed laws that nullified all Cherokee laws, prohibited the Cherokee legislature from meeting, and ordered the arrest of any Cherokee who argued against moving to the West. Furthermore, the Georgians found an ally in a new president, Andrew Jackson, who announced his support for Georgia, refused to keep federal troops in the mining area to enforce the Indians’ rights, and urged the Indians to move west.

Some in the federal Congress opposed removing the Indians from their homes, churches, and schools to send them to a “wilderness.” That minority pointed out that the “evil . . . is enormous; the violence is extreme; the breach of public faith deplorable; the inevitable suffering incalculable.” But a congressional majority felt differently. And Congress enacted a removal bill that was intended to enforce the president’s position.

Lacking sufficient support in the elected branches of the federal government, where could the Cherokees turn for help? Could they look to the law? After supporting the British during the Revolution, the tribe had signed treaties with the new United States in which the United States promised to protect the Cherokees’ land and guarantee its boundaries. The Constitution specifically says that not only the Constitution and laws made thereunder but also “all Treatiesmade . . . under the Authority of the United States shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the . . . Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Although the Cherokees’ legal case seemed ironclad, the same political circumstances that led them to put their hopes in the law made it difficult to get that law enforced. The Georgians would not protect them. A majority in Congress apparently did not care. And Andrew Jackson had refused the Indians’ request to enforce their treaty. Hence, the Cherokees could look only to the courts for protection.

But the tribe’s unpopularity and political weakness made bringing a lawsuit more difficult than one might think. The tribe found a lawyer, William Wirt, a former attorney general of the United States and one of the greatest lawyers of his day. Wirt thought that “the Supreme Court would protect” the tribe. But Wirt could not be certain that Georgia would follow the law, even if embodied in a Supreme Court decision. After all, some years earlier, when John Quincy Adams was president, the Georgians had seized land belonging to the Creek tribe, passed resolutions declaring they owned it, sent surveyors to map the territory, and said they would “resist to the utmost” any federal effort, including any Supreme Court effort, to stop them. After all this, the Creeks just
gave up.

Moreover, how was Wirt to get his case to the Supreme Court? He hesitated to bring a case in Georgia’s own courts—for example, by suing Georgians for trespass. He feared that Georgia state judges might indefinitely delay matters by raising problems of state property law. He thought for a time that he might represent a Cherokee Indian—Corn Tassel—whom the Georgians had arrested for committing a serious crime in Cherokee territory. Wirt would appeal Corn Tassel’s case to the Supreme Court, arguing that Georgia did not have the power to enforce its laws in the Cherokees’ territory. But Georgia’s governor and legislature announced that they would pay no attention to the Court’s decision and would resist with force any effort to enforce a Supreme Court order. To make certain a Court order would have no effect, Georgia executed Corn Tassel before the Supreme Court could hear the case.

Wirt next tried suing Georgia directly in the Supreme Court, in the case of Cherokee Nation v. Georgia

"Sobre este título" puede pertenecer a otra edición de este libro.

Los mejores resultados en AbeBooks

1.

Breyer, Stephen
Editorial: Vintage (2011)
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Paperback Cantidad: 1
Librería
OceanwaveBooks
(Manhattan Beach, CA, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción Vintage, 2011. Paperback. Estado de conservación: New. New Condition. Clean crisp tight copy, no marks or tears. Email Notification. Satisfaction Guaranteed. Nº de ref. de la librería ppl1702209625

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 6,37
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 3,38
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

2.

Breyer, Stephen
Editorial: Vintage
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos PAPERBACK Cantidad: 1
Librería
Recycleabook
(West Carrollton, OH, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción Vintage. PAPERBACK. Estado de conservación: New. 0307390837 US STUDENT EDITION - Free Tracking number with every purchase. Satisfaction guaranteed. Orders ship within 1-2 business days. (Hawaii,Alaska, Puerto Rico and APO's, allow additional time for delivery.). Nº de ref. de la librería Z0307390837ZN

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 6,38
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 3,38
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

3.

Breyer, Stephen
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Cantidad: > 20
Librería
Paperbackshop-US
(Wood Dale, IL, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción 2011. PAP. Estado de conservación: New. New Book. Shipped from US within 10 to 14 business days. Established seller since 2000. Nº de ref. de la librería VR-9780307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 7,23
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 3,38
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

4.

Breyer, Stephen
Editorial: Vintage (2011)
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Paperback Cantidad: 1
Librería
Symposia Community Bookstore INC
(Hoboken, NJ, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción Vintage, 2011. Paperback. Estado de conservación: New. Brand new. Nº de ref. de la librería 170921078

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 6,67
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 4,24
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

5.

BREYER, STEPHEN
Editorial: Penguin Random House
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Cantidad: > 20
Librería
INDOO
(Avenel, NJ, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción Penguin Random House. Estado de conservación: New. Brand New. Nº de ref. de la librería 0307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 8,12
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 2,97
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

6.

Stephen Breyer
Editorial: VINTAGE, United States (2011)
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Paperback Cantidad: 1
Librería
The Book Depository US
(London, Reino Unido)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción VINTAGE, United States, 2011. Paperback. Estado de conservación: New. Reprint. Language: English . Brand New Book. Charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the awesome power to strike down laws enacted by our elected representatives. Why does the public accept the Court s decisions as legitimate and follow them, even when those decisions are highly unpopular? What must the Court do to maintain the public s faith? How can it help make our democracy work? In this groundbreaking book, Justice Stephen Breyer tackles these questions and more, offering an original approach to interpreting the Constitution that judges, lawyers, and scholars will look to for many years to come. Nº de ref. de la librería AAS9780307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 11,48
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: GRATIS
De Reino Unido a Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

7.

Breyer, Stephen
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Cantidad: 5
Librería
Pbshop
(Wood Dale, IL, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción 2011. PAP. Estado de conservación: New. New Book.Shipped from US within 10 to 14 business days. Established seller since 2000. Nº de ref. de la librería IB-9780307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 8,39
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 3,38
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

8.

Stephen Breyer
Editorial: VINTAGE, United States (2011)
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Paperback Cantidad: 1
Librería
The Book Depository
(London, Reino Unido)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción VINTAGE, United States, 2011. Paperback. Estado de conservación: New. Reprint. Language: English . Brand New Book. Charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the awesome power to strike down laws enacted by our elected representatives. Why does the public accept the Court s decisions as legitimate and follow them, even when those decisions are highly unpopular? What must the Court do to maintain the public s faith? How can it help make our democracy work? In this groundbreaking book, Justice Stephen Breyer tackles these questions and more, offering an original approach to interpreting the Constitution that judges, lawyers, and scholars will look to for many years to come. Nº de ref. de la librería AAS9780307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 11,93
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: GRATIS
De Reino Unido a Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

9.

Stephen Breyer
Editorial: VINTAGE, United States (2011)
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos Paperback Cantidad: 10
Librería
Book Depository hard to find
(London, Reino Unido)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción VINTAGE, United States, 2011. Paperback. Estado de conservación: New. Reprint. Language: English . This book usually ship within 10-15 business days and we will endeavor to dispatch orders quicker than this where possible. Brand New Book. Charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the awesome power to strike down laws enacted by our elected representatives. Why does the public accept the Court s decisions as legitimate and follow them, even when those decisions are highly unpopular? What must the Court do to maintain the public s faith? How can it help make our democracy work? In this groundbreaking book, Justice Stephen Breyer tackles these questions and more, offering an original approach to interpreting the Constitution that judges, lawyers, and scholars will look to for many years to come. Nº de ref. de la librería BTE9780307390837

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 11,93
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: GRATIS
De Reino Unido a Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

10.

Breyer, Stephen
Editorial: Vintage
ISBN 10: 0307390837 ISBN 13: 9780307390837
Nuevos PAPERBACK Cantidad: > 20
Librería
Mediaoutlet12345
(Springfield, VA, Estados Unidos de America)
Valoración
[?]

Descripción Vintage. PAPERBACK. Estado de conservación: New. 0307390837 *BRAND NEW* Ships Same Day or Next!. Nº de ref. de la librería SWATI2132142449

Más información sobre esta librería | Hacer una pregunta a la librería

Comprar nuevo
EUR 9,67
Convertir moneda

Añadir al carrito

Gastos de envío: EUR 3,38
A Estados Unidos de America
Destinos, gastos y plazos de envío

Existen otras copia(s) de este libro

Ver todos los resultados de su búsqueda