When Labels Fail

About the Book

WHEN LABELS FAIL: A PARADOXICAL VIEW OF THE SUPREME COURT

As in recent actions of the Supreme Court concerning same sex marriage and the Affordable Care Act, don´t be surprised when pundits and ideologues fail at predictions regarding pending decisions of the Court. This book explains why so many get it wrong so often. At root cause are erroneous preconceptions about the Court. "I´m not big on labels" replied retiring Associate Justice John Paul Stevens during an interview concerning changing blocs on the Supreme Court. “I don’t use labels to describe what I do” is how Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor responded during her confirmation hearing when a senator sought to categorize her judicial philosophy. Simplistic labels for the justices have repeatedly misled Presidents, Senators, lawyers, and pundits with regard to the performance of justices on the Supreme Court. Despite best efforts to predict behavior of nominees for the Court, the justices defied political categorization, such as:

• The Virginia lawyer who lost his states’ rights case before the Supreme Court, but went on to support Federalist Party causes as Chief Justice.
• The ex-Federalist Party politician and Secretary of the Treasury who as Chief Justice strongly supported states’ rights.
• The esteemed Massachusetts justice who outraged the progressive president who nominated him to the Court by voting to strike down key anti-trust legislation.
• The co-founder of the American Civil Liberties Union who shocked former colleagues by consistently voting to curtail civil liberties and civil rights in cases before the Court.
• The staunch New Deal supporter who over his long tenure on the Court came to favor individual rights and liberties over governmental power.
• The former Ku Klux Klan member who helped forge a unanimous Court ruling in the seminal decision against racial segregation.
• Appointed by a liberal Democratic president, the justice who steadfastly supported law and order, the right to life, and other conservative causes.
• An originalist whose conservative methodology frequently leads to liberal results.

This book explores the origin of the separation of powers doctrine, how the Constitution created a judiciary designed to stand apart from the “political” branches of government, and how justices have asserted independence as a third branch of government from John Jay to John Roberts.

About the Author

Charles Shotwell, a lawyer, professor, former State Department official, and currently international trade consultant, brings a fresh perspective to the subject of the Supreme Court. As an Associate Professor at the U.S. Air Force Academy, he taught courses on the Supreme Court, American government, national security law, defense policy, and international affairs. He has published and lectured on a wide variety of topics, including the constitutional separation of powers, the law of armed conflict, and globalization. Lecture venues include the American Bar Association, Georgetown Law Center, Catholic University Law School, the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, National Defense University, George Washington University, and American University, among others. Recently, he has provided pro bono assistance to the International Law Institute's Africa Center for Legal Excellence.