Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2012437112> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 50 of
50
with 100 items per page.
- W2012437112 endingPage "838" @default.
- W2012437112 startingPage "825" @default.
- W2012437112 abstract "NE OF THE MAJOR THEMES in recent writings about the United States Supreme Court has been its treatment of civil liberties cases. During Chief Justice Vinson's tenure much comment, pro and con, was elicited by the Court's comparatively restraintist approach to such cases. And in the years of Chief Justice Warren, as the Court has become more activist, the same writers have labored the same themes, but with the pros and the cons reversed. The attitudes and voting records of individual justices have been closely scanned to see whether they measured to the standards of the investigator; box scores have been compiled purporting to show such attitudes;' particular justices have had their attackers and defenders and more than one sitting judge has doffed his judicial halo long enough to defend himself (sometimes more effectively than his admirers). The present writer has been among those who have attacked the Vinson court and defended the Warren court;2 and with the judges and other writers he has been accused of fostering the same approach to civil liberties which did the Court so much harm when it was used in the economic sphere before 1937.3 But such charges have been often denied, and the modern-day activists are seemingly fairly well convinced that they have built up a rationale to distinguish the two types of cases which is convincing (at least to themselves): they no longer have guilt feelings about their own inconsistency on this score.4 There is, however, another question with which the defenders of activism in civil liberties have not dealt effectively as yet. This is the question involving the Fourteenth Amendment. After all, say the critics, even if you prove that the Bill of Rights should be industriously applied by the Court, the fact remains that the first eight amendments apply only to federal action; and while the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has been used to extend parts of the Bill of Rights to the states, this process is really illegitimate because the clause does not logically bear such interpretation and because this amounts to the use of the nowdiscredited substantive interpretation of the clause. So another inconsistency is charged against the libertarians. The present article is an attempt to investigate such criticism and lay the groundwork (if possible) for a defense. Put simply," @default.
- W2012437112 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2012437112 creator A5003457864 @default.
- W2012437112 date "1961-12-01" @default.
- W2012437112 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
- W2012437112 title "The Supreme Court and State Civil Liberties" @default.
- W2012437112 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/106591296101400401" @default.
- W2012437112 hasPublicationYear "1961" @default.
- W2012437112 type Work @default.
- W2012437112 sameAs 2012437112 @default.
- W2012437112 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W2012437112 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2012437112 hasAuthorship W2012437112A5003457864 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C2775923278 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C11413529 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C17744445 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C199539241 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C2775923278 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C2778272461 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C41008148 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C48103436 @default.
- W2012437112 hasConceptScore W2012437112C94625758 @default.
- W2012437112 hasIssue "4" @default.
- W2012437112 hasLocation W20124371121 @default.
- W2012437112 hasOpenAccess W2012437112 @default.
- W2012437112 hasPrimaryLocation W20124371121 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W1485184578 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2016717044 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2322794766 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2326404325 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2334954755 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2796780499 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W2806704996 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W4246943810 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W4312757552 @default.
- W2012437112 hasRelatedWork W92517169 @default.
- W2012437112 hasVolume "14" @default.
- W2012437112 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2012437112 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2012437112 magId "2012437112" @default.
- W2012437112 workType "article" @default.