- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
"In this thought-provoking volume, the academically distinguished 'justices' of the 'Balkin Court' offer competing thoughts about the role of the Supreme Court and the Constitution in overcoming racial discrimination. Complete with helpful introductory material, commentary on their opinions by each 'justice,' and the texts of the original Brown decisions, What Brown v. Board of Education Should Have Said is a valuable source of ideas, commentary, and insights into the challenges of racial discrimination, both historical and present."
-Gerald Rosenberg,Northwestern University School of Law
"This intriguing collection provides unique insights into the way today's constitutional theorists would go about deciding Brown v. Board of Education, and into contemporary constitutional theory more generally. It also illuminates Brown v. Board of Education itself, by bringing the insights of nearly fifty years of experience to bear on the problem the Court faced in 1954. Those interested in Brown and in constitutional theory will all benefit from thinking about what these authors have to say."
-Mark Tushnet,Georgetown University Law Center
"A remarkable collection of writings. The eminent scholars it features articulate with insight and passion a wide range of views. No other book better relates the Supreme Court's landmark decision of 1954 to the debates and anxieties of our own time."
-Randall Kennedy,Harvard Law School
"Balkan offers his own assessment in a critical introduction and the iconic impact of Brown."
-Black Issues Book Review,
"Balkin persuasively argues that the courts play a vital role in tempering the nation's political and legal mechanisms."
-Journal of the West,
|Pt. I||Brown v. Board of Education - A Critical Introduction|
|1||Brown as Icon||3|
|2||The History of the Brown Litigation||29|
|3||Rewriting Brown: A Guide to the Opinions||44|
|Pt. II||Revised Opinions in Brown v. Board of Education|
|Jack M. Balkin (judgment of the Court)||77|
|Drew S. Days III (concurring)||92|
|Bruce Ackerman (concurring)||100|
|Frank I. Michelman (concurring in part and concurring in the judgment)||124|
|John Hart Ely (concurring in the judgment except as to the remedy)||135|
|Catharine A. MacKinnon (concurring in the judgment)||143|
|Michael W. McConnell (concurring in the judgment)||158|
|Cass R. Sunstein (concurring in the judgment)||174|
|Derrick A. Bell (dissenting)||185|
|Comments from the Contributors||201|
|App. A||The Supreme Court's Original Opinions in Brown 1, Bolling, and Brown II|
|App. B||The Constitution of the United States of America: Selected Provisions||233|
|About the Contributors||243|
|Table of Cases||247|
Posted February 24, 2004
Did you include the true facts of the case and how MacKinley Burnett who was serving as the NAACP President and was on the fore- front of this case.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.