>>> nathan at newman.org 05/16/01 10:35PM >>>
----- Original Message -----
From: LeoCasey at aol.com
To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: Judicial Review, Judicial Restraint, Judicial Activism and
Rights
>But when Nathan looks at the area of civil rights law under the Warren
Court,
>his argument is in effect -- he avoids using this specific language, given
>his general thesis -- that the Court did not go far enough in its judicial
>activism. It should have overturned not simply Plessy v. Ferguson, with its
>"separate but equal" doctrine, but also the Civil Rights Cases, which
gutted
>the Reconstruction era Civil Rights Act of 1875.
Here Leo misses or at least downplays the point I was making, which was I argued that the Warren Court might have been more radical if it had not overturned Plessy - an act of judicial restraint by an earlier Court in that it upheld segregation laws in the states - but had rather overturned the precedent of the Civil Rights Cases, which were acts of extreme judicial activism.
((((((((
CB: Probably, but did the lawyers who framed _Brown_ make the Civil Rights Cases at issue ?