My Extended Rebuttal to the Libertarian Theory of “Judicial Engagement”

I have been writing about the libertarian theory of “judicial engagement” since I became aware of it a few years ago. The theory has been promoted relentlessly by libertarian scholars associated with the Cato Institute and the Institute for Justice, especially Clark Neily, Roger Pilon, and Randy Barnett. The theory was advanced at book length in Neily’s Terms of Engagement (2013). I strongly disagree with the notion that unelected federal judges should be given unlimited discretion to divine unwritten (or “unenumerated”) rights nowhere appearing in the text of the Constitution. I likewise believe that presuming all laws to be unconstitutional and placing the burden of proof on the government to defend them would emasculate representative self-government. In short, I regard the theory as a libertarian fantasy and a prescription for disaster.

 

It has been a topic I have addressed on Law & Liberty (e.g., here and here), National Review (here), American Greatness (here), City Journal (here), and Modern Age (here). A libertarian acquaintance who is a proponent of judicial engagement characterized my “more recent work”–which presumably includes the foregoing articles–as consisting of “mostly of thinly sourced blog posts.” Well, the Texas Review of Law & Politics has just published my extended critique of and rebuttal to judicial engagement–46 pages of text with almost 200 footnotes. The title is “Unleashing the ‘Least Dangerous’ Branch: Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?” It is available online here.

I hope you read it, and enjoy it. It will be back from the printer, and in the hands of TROLP subscribers, shortly.

  • “Mark Pulliam is one of the few truly fearless, devastatingly incisive, original and yet deeply learned commentators on the contemporary legal scene.  His new blog is a welcome addition and a splendid and provocative resource.”
    Professor Stephen B. Presser
    Raoul Berger Professor of Legal History Emeritus, Northwestern University School of Law
  • “Mark Pulliam is the Walt Longmire of legal conservatism. You don't want to be on the wrong end of his pen. His commentary on law, politics, and policy is not to be missed.”
    Richard Reinsch II
    Director of Law and Liberty, Liberty Fund, Inc.
  • “Mark's blistering criticism of the foibles of the lawyering class and crackpot judges is a worthy penance for a recovering attorney. And it is our gain.”
    Michael Thompson
    Shareholder, Wright & Greenhill, P.C.
  • “Maybe this man’s degree is written in crayon."
    StupidEvilBastard.com
    StupidEvilBastard.com
  • “With the flourish of a pen, Mark Pulliam makes bad guys rhetorically bleed and weak guys physically cringe. It's awesome.”
    Michael Quinn Sullivan
    President & CEO, Empower Texans
  • "Mark Pulliam, writer and thinker extraordinaire, has a new blog. Make sure to visit and register. Mark Pulliam's new blog is a thing of wit and intelligence."
    Bradley J. Birzer
    Professor of History, Hillsdale College, President of the American Ideas Institute, and editor at large of The Imaginative Conservative
Featured In

Sign up for updates

Get the latest updates, news, and alerts directly from the source.
We promise, we don't spam.

Featured Tweets

Everything about Jim Acosta is a farce: his posing as a “reporter”; CNN’s sanctimony over the suspension of his pre… https://t.co/PqDsViVhEU
- Sunday Nov 18 - 1:45pm