Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to watch the video

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Calabresi, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Federalism and the Rehnquist Court: A Normative Defense

Steven G. Calabresi

Northwestern University

The revival of federalism limits on national power by the U.S. Supreme Court is a happy development for three reasons. First, judicial review is as beneficial and as needed in federalism cases as it is in Fourteenth Amendment cases, and such judicial review does not raise the problems of the countermajoritarian difficulty. Second, Congress cannot be trusted alone to police the federalism boundaries that limit its own power. Finally, federalism is an incredibly important feature of the American constitutional order. This is indicated by (1) the prominence of federalism concerns in the text of our Constitution; (2) the importance of federalism in other countries around the world today; (3) the fact that the economics of federalism suggest some well-known reasons why constitutionally mandated decentralization is a good thing; and (4) the serious concerns about the dangers of excessive national power implicated by the specific issues that the Supreme Court's federalism case law touches upon.

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 574, No. 1, 24-36 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/000271620157400102
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PubliusHome page
M. H. Bosworth
"An Innate Sense of Fairness": State Responses to the U.S. Supreme Court's Sovereign Immunity Decisions
Publius, January 1, 2006; 36(3): 393 - 420.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Law Med EthicsHome page
W. E. Parmet
After September 11: Rethinking Public Health Federalism
J. Law Med. Ethics, June 1, 2002; 30(2): 201 - 211.
[PDF]