Archibald Cox has written a short, controversial, and rather comprehensive analysis of the Warren Court. The book is a blend of legal analysis covering the "political issues" that have confronted the court, how the court did confront these issues, and how the author agrees or disagrees with the court's judgment. An added reform dimension to the analysis reveals some of the political subtlety which necessarily underlies many of the Court's constitutional probes. The core question which presents itself traditionally and in this analysis goes to the constant question of judicial passivity or activism. What is the charge of the Constitutional Court in a tripartite "balanced" system of government, and how can the Court meet this charge, which actually it fixes for itself from its own reading of the Constitution and its adherence or nonadherence to past-posited guidelines?
Leonard V. Kaplan,
Book Review: The Supreme Court: A Question of Relevance—A Review of The Warren Court, Constitutional Decision as an Instrument of Reform by Archibald Cox,
48 Neb. L. Rev. 183
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol48/iss1/7