Cass R. Sunstein is the Karl N. Llewellyn Distinguished Service Professor of Jurisprudence at the University
of Chicago. He is the author of After the Rights Revolution, The Partial Constitution, Risk vs. Risk, and One Case
at a Time (all from Harvard).
Review
"With his new book, Sunstein joins a distinguished line of liberal constitutional theorists who have defended
the democratic value of judicial modesty...[One Case at a Time is] uniquely well-suited to an age that has lost
its constitutional faith...No other scholar has captured the temper of the current majority as neatly as Sunstein,
nor has anyone else attempted to provide a theoretical justification for what other observers took to be ad-hockery
or improvisation. For these reasons, Sunstein's book deserves close attention."
--Jeffrey Rosen, New Republic
"Sunstein is among this country's most respected legal scholars [and] One Case at a Time reflects [his] mastery
of Supreme Court law, of constitutional theory and of political science...One Case at a Time presents a fascinating
argument: that there is a hidden majority of [judicial minimalist] Justices, that it is right in what it is doing
and that it is adjudicating in a way that moves beyond the recent ideological stalemate about the Supreme Court's
role...[Sunstein's] book demonstrates what a shame it is that the Clinton White House hasn't picked him to serve
as a Federal judge. The Reagan and Bush Administrations put accomplished legal theorists on the bench to turn their
conservative vision into legal reality. But the Clinton team has failed to follow the Reagan-Bush lead... One Case
at a Time makes that reluctance look like a significant lost opportunity. Respectful of the political branches,
mindful of the role of the Supreme Court in the whole of American government, this admirable book makes a judicious
case for a philosophy of judging as a humble, difficult, essential art. The book also demonstrates that Sunstein
would practice that art well. "
--Lincoln Caplan, New York Times Book Review
"In a lucid examination of specific cases, Mr. Sunstein demonstrates how [judicial minimalism] should be done
and achieves what has so far been elusive, a genuine theory of judicial minimalism, which many judges strive for
but often have difficulty describing or justifying. "
--The Economist
"With One Case at a Time, Cass Sunstein may well become known as the Nathan Detroit of constitutional law.
For this is a shrewd and clever book. "
--Gary McDowell, Washington Times
"In One Case at a Time, Sunstein describes the current Supreme Court's 'judicial minimalism'--deciding cases
as narrowly as possible, without widely applicable rules. This position, he urges, can support deliberative democracy,
particularly if the issues involved are complex and no citizen consensus has emerged. Sunstein outlines his arguments
and applies it in analyzing recent decisions on 'affirmative action, discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual
orientation, the right to die, and new issues of free speech raised by...communications technologies.' He then
addresses alternatives to minimalism, mainly Justice Scalia's 'democratic formalism' and the complaint that minimalist
decisions lack theoretical depth as well as breadth, concluding by summarizing his view of the place of judicial
minimalism in a democracy. "
--Mary Carroll, Booklist
"Labeling and 'bean counting' of the Supreme Court and its Justices are frequently all that Americans get
by way of description of the activities of the highest court in our system. Even the legal profession finds it
is easier to label than to analyze. That is why Cass Sunstein's book is just what the country needs--an understandable
analysis of how this Supreme Court goes about its decision making. If it seems to make the 'conservatives' the
'activists' and the 'liberals' the 'strict constructionists,' that only proves that those labels are not very useful
and more often than not reflect the eye of the beholder. Nor can Professor Sunstein's use of the word minimalism
be dismissed as just another pretty label. The term aptly describes what has been the very touchstone of both the
common law and constitutional theory in America for a long, long time. The book represents Sunstein at his best."
--Abner J. Mikva, former Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
"Against the tide of those who lament the lost Warren Court or hunger for its conservative successor, Cass
Sunstein argues that the current Supreme Court correctly avoids grand constitutional theories in favor of narrow
decision making that leaves most matters of distribution and social justice to be decided by democratic majorities.
Written with great lucidity, verve, and mastery of contemporary currents in political theory and constitutional
law, this is the first judicial philosophy of and for the post-Bork appointees to the Court."
--Kathleen M. Sullivan, Stanford Law School
Harvard University Press Web Site, May, 2002
Summary
Abortion, affirmative action, the "right to die," pornography and free speech, homosexuality and sex
discrimination: as eagerly as the Supreme Court's rulings on these hot issues are awaited and as intently as they're
studied, they never seem to settle anything once and for all. But something is settled in the process--in the incremental
approach--as Cass Sunstein shows us in this instructive book.
One of America's preeminent constitutional scholars, Sunstein mounts a defense of the most striking characteristic
of modern constitutional law: the inclination to decide one case at a time. Examining various controversies, he
shows how--and why--the Court has avoided broad rulings on issues from the legitimacy of affirmative action to
the "right to die," and in doing so has fostered rather than foreclosed public debate on these difficult
topics. He offers an original perspective on the right of free speech and the many novel questions raised by Congress's
efforts to regulate violent and sexual materials on new media such as the Internet and cable television. And on
the relationship between the Constitution and homosexuality and sex discrimination, he reveals how the Court has
tried to ensure against second-class citizenship--and the public expression of contempt for anyone--while leaving
a degree of flexibility to the political process.
One Case at a Time also lays out, and celebrates, the remarkable constellation of rights--involving both liberty
and equality--that now commands a consensus in American law. An authoritative guide to the Supreme Court, the book
offers a new understanding of the American Constitution, and of the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism,
and between rights and self-government.
