When President Reagan nominated William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia to replace him as Associate on the Supreme Court, he explained that he wanted judges who would be "attentive to the rights specifically guaranteed in our Constitution and the proper role of the courts in our democratic system." On the surface that remark certainly seemed both reasonable and moderate, a respectful back-to-basics prescription for the high court. To a host of legal scholars, Democratic politicians and aroused liberals who saw beneath the surface, however, the words meant something else altogether. The President, these critics complained, was wrapping himself in...
To continue reading:
or
Log-In
