Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Partisan Teamsmanship and American Constitutionalism

Bibliographic Data

ID24241307
AuthorsGregory Elinson (Northern Illinois University)
Year2026
Pages1-26
Publication date2026-10-29
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueLaw & Social Inquiry (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0897-6546 • E-ISSN: 1747-4469
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/lsi.2026.10175
OpenAlexW7224321909
LanguageEN
References cited24

It is often suggested that, in a constitutional democracy like that of the United States, doing law is distinct from doing politics, and so judges ought to put aside their partisan interests when rendering decisions. This review essay contests this view on two fronts. Bringing together Mark Graber’s Punish Treason and Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War and Laura Kalman’s FDR’s Gambit: The Court-Packing Fight and the Rise of Legal Liberalism , I observe that during both Reconstruction and the New Deal, it was generally accepted by political elites inside and outside the judiciary that the dominant party ought to make constitutional decisions with their partisan consequences well in view. Working from this history, the essay then considers how this kind of partisan teamsmanship might apply to contemporary constitutional politics in the United States. It concludes that so long as parties remain institutional vehicles for vindicating core beliefs and principles held by the public, partisan teamsmanship by judges may be less dangerous to our constitutional system than contemporary critics of the US Supreme Court presume.

American Constitutional Law and Politics · Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies · Judicial and Constitutional Studies

  • Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty

    Mark Alan Graber•Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty•2023

  • On the Rule of Law

    Open Access•Brian Z Tamanaha, Brian Ζ Tamanaha•On the Rule of Law•2004

  • The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal, Harold J Spaeth•Supreme Court and the Attitudinal…•2002

  • The Promise of Party in a Polarized Age

    Russell Muirhead•Promise of Party in a Polarized Age•2014

  • Beyond Ideology

    Frances E Lee, Frances Lee•Beyond Ideology•2009

  • The Strange Career of Frank Murphy

    Open Access•James Wolfinger•Historian•2002

  • The Southern Imposition

    Open Access•Sean Farhang, Ira Katznelson•Studies in American Political…•2005

  • Judicial Partisanship and the Slaughterhouse Cases

    Open Access•Gregory Elinson•Studies in American Political…•2017

  • The Search for an Anchor

    Open Access•Calvin Terbeek•Law & Social Inquiry•2021

  • The Breakup of the Roosevelt Supreme Court

    Robert Harrison, Robert S Harrison•Law and History Review•1984

  • Insecure Majorities

    Frances E Lee•Insecure Majorities•2016

  • Pivotal politics

    Keith Krehbiel•Pivotal politics•1998

  • The people themselves

    Larry Kramer, Larry D Kramer•The people themselves•2004

  • After the “Master Theory

    Open Access•Jacob S Hacker, Paul Pierson•Perspectives on Politics•2014

  • Polarization and the Judiciary

    Richard L Hasen•Annual Review of Political Science•2019

  • Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law

    Herbert Wechsler•Harvard Law Review•1959

Highly citedNo
Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae