Keith E. Whittington

Bio: Keith E. Whittington is an academic researcher from Princeton University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Supreme court & Politics. The author has an hindex of 17, co-authored 120 publications receiving 1627 citations. Previous affiliations of Keith E. Whittington include University Press of Kansas & The Catholic University of America.

Making a Mountain Out of a Molehill? Marbury and the Construction of the Constitutional Canon

Abstract: How important was Marbury v. Madison in American constitutional history? This article examines judicial, legislative and executive citations and legal commentary to show that Marbury did not enter the constitutional canon as the fountainhead of judicial review until the turn of the twentieth century. In doing so, it reveals the process by which historical memories are constructed and adds to our understanding about the diverse sources of judicial review in the early republic and the rhetoric of judicial authority.

James Madison Has Left the Building

Abstract: Judicial review is often thought to be an absolute veto, killing legislation with no hope of resurrection. The adoption of judicial review, therefore, is understood to be a potentially severe qualification to democratic government. It was this understanding that once drove American progressives such as Theodore Roosevelt to endorse the "judicial recall" that would have allowed "the people to rule" by overriding judicial constitutional doctrine;' that led Canada to include the "notwithstanding" clause in its Charter, shielding legislation from judicial nullification;2 and that now spurs some to urge the remaining Westminster systems to resist pressures to curb parliamentary sovereignty with judicial review. But how warranted is this assumption? Creative and persistent legislators will try to reanimate these statutory corpses, and it is an open question whether judicial disapproval really lays the issue to rest. Congress is sometimes quick to try to resuscitate at the federal level what the Court strikes down at the state level. Often these legislative exertions are serious only as political theater. The Flag Protection Act of 19894 and the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003' come to

Judicial Review of Congress Database Codebook

Abstract: The Judicial Review of Congress Database catalogs all the cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court has substantively reviewed the constitutionality of a provision or application of a federal law. The database currently includes 1308 cases decided by the Court from its founding through its October 2017 term and related pieces of information about those cases. This document includes a description of the variables found in the Judicial Review of Congress Database, a description of how the cases were selected, and a link to the publicly accessible database.

A Man for All Seasons: Historical Memory and John Marshall

Abstract: The heroes of American politics are often represented as timeless figures, sometimes literally carved in stone. A growing literature on collective memory, however, has emphasized the ways in which historical reputations are socially constructed—and reconstructed—over time. This article considers Chief Justice John Marshall as a case study in this dynamic process of constructing historical reputation. Marshall stands above all others as “the great chief justice,” but nonetheless his reputation has not always been secure. Surveying both citations to Marshall’s key opinions and popular and scholarly discussions of the chief justice himself across time, the article shows how Marshall’s reputation has been remade over time to fit the political needs of the moment. Marshall’s durability as a historical figure has turned not on a single set of particularly timeless accomplishments but on the diversity of his contributions to the constitutional canon.

Judicial Checks on the President

Abstract: The judicial check on the American presidency is a supplemental tool for limiting executive power. Even so, the courts do provide a potential mechanism for constraining the executive branch. This chapter reviews both the doctrinal framework and the empirical literature regarding how courts monitor and check the executive branch.

The collected works

Abstract: This is a review of Collected Works of John Tate. Parts I, II, edited by Barry Mazur and Jean-Pierre Serre. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 2016. For several decades it has been clear to the friends and colleagues of John Tate that a “Collected Works” was merited. The award of the Abel Prize to Tate in 2010 added impetus, and finally, in Tate’s ninety-second year we have these two magnificent volumes, edited by Barry Mazur and Jean-Pierre Serre. Beyond Tate’s published articles, they include five unpublished articles and a selection of his letters, most accompanied by Tate’s comments, and a collection of photographs of Tate. For an overview of Tate’s work, the editors refer the reader to [4]. Before discussing the volumes, I describe some of Tate’s work. 1. Hecke L-series and Tate’s thesis Like many budding number theorists, Tate’s favorite theorem when young was Gauss’s law of quadratic reciprocity. When he arrived at Princeton as a graduate student in 1946, he was fortunate to find there the person, Emil Artin, who had discovered the most general reciprocity law, so solving Hilbert’s ninth problem. By 1920, the German school of algebraic number theorists (Hilbert, Weber, . . .) together with its brilliant student Takagi had succeeded in classifying the abelian extensions of a number field K: to each group I of ideal classes in K, there is attached an extension L of K (the class field of I); the group I determines the arithmetic of the extension L/K, and the Galois group of L/K is isomorphic to I. Artin’s contribution was to prove (in 1927) that there is a natural isomorphism from I to the Galois group of L/K. When the base field contains an appropriate root of 1, Artin’s isomorphism gives a reciprocity law, and all possible reciprocity laws arise this way. In the 1930s, Chevalley reworked abelian class field theory. In particular, he replaced “ideals” with his “idèles” which greatly clarified the relation between the local and global aspects of the theory. For his thesis, Artin suggested that Tate do the same for Hecke L-series. When Hecke proved that the abelian L-functions of number fields (generalizations of Dirichlet’s L-functions) have an analytic continuation throughout the plane with a functional equation of the expected type, he saw that his methods applied even to a new kind of L-function, now named after him. Once Tate had developed his harmonic analysis of local fields and of the idèle group, he was able prove analytic continuation and functional equations for all the relevant L-series without Hecke’s complicated theta-formulas. Received by the editors September 5, 2016. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 01A75, 11-06, 14-06. c ©2017 American Mathematical Society

Law's Empire

Abstract: Scholars of culture, humanities and social sciences have increasingly come to an appreciation of the importance of the legal domain in social life, while critically engaged socio-legal scholars around the world have taken up the task of understanding "Law's Empire" in all of its cultural, political, and economic dimensions. The questions arising from these intersections, and addressing imperialisms past and present forms the subject matter of a special symposium issue of Social Identities under the editorship of Griffith University's Rob McQueen, and UBC's Wes Pue and with contributions from McQueen, Ian Duncanson, Renisa Mawani, David Williams, Emma Cunliffe, Chidi Oguamanam, W. Wesley Pue, Fatou Camara, and Dianne Kirkby. This paper introduces the volume, forthcoming in late 2007. The central problematique of this issue has previously been explored through the 2005 Law's Empire conference, an informal but vibrant postcolonial legal studies network.

Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases

Abstract: New democracies around the world have adopted constitutional courts to oversee the operation of democratic politics. Where does judicial power come from, how does it develop in the early stages of democratic liberalization, and what political conditions support its expansion? This book answers these questions through an examination of three constitutional courts in Asia: Taiwan, Korea, and Mongolia. In a region that has traditionally viewed law as a tool of authoritarian rulers, constitutional courts in these three societies are becoming a real constraint on government. In contrast with conventional culturalist accounts, this book argues that the design and functioning of constitutional review are largely a function of politics and interests. Judicial review - the power of judges to rule an act of a legislature or national leader unconstitutional - is a solution to the problem of uncertainty in constitutional design. By providing 'insurance' to prospective electoral losers, judicial review can facilitate democracy.