U.S. Supreme Court,
Criminal,
Constitutional Law
Aug. 13, 2009
Not a Minimalist Court
Contrary to claims that the Roberts court is a minimalist one, many of the criminal cases tackled this term showed unnecessary breadth, writes Erwin Chemerinsky.
Erwin Chemerinsky
Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law
Erwin's most recent book is "Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism." He is also the author of "Closing the Courthouse," (Yale University Press 2017).
FORUM COLUMN
By Erwin Chemerinsky In the six weeks since the Supreme Court completed its latest term, many commentators have proclaimed that it shows the Roberts Court to be a minimalist court, deciding important questions of constitutional law narrowly. Although occasionally this is true, what is striking is the overall inaccuracy of this characterization. In the just-completed term, there were numerous cases that dramatically changed the law; in m...For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In