- Daniel J. Galvin, Northwestern University, author of Presidential Party Building: Dwight D. Eisenhower to George W. Bush
"Professor Stephen Engel has written a smart, historically sophisticated book that substantially improves both our understanding of judicial independence and the political construction of judicial power."
- Mark A. Graber, University of Maryland
"From the Founding forward, Americans have eyed judicial power suspiciously. Nevertheless, the trajectory of that power has been ever upward. In this broad-range assessment of the puzzle of American judicial supremacy, Engel argues that, while, prior to the Civil War, the resistance to the rise of judicial power was genuine and hard-fought, in its aftermath it became half-hearted, pragmatic, and symbolic. Only when politicians who had formerly considered their political opponents existential threats newly imagined them as true compatriots was the institutional space cleared for the construction of a permanently powerful judiciary. Through a kaleidoscopic integration of original historical sources with large and diverse literatures on political thought, presidential rhetoric, political parties, and constitutional law, Engel advances a bold and controversial claim. This is an original, ambitious, and illuminating study that contributes significantly to our understanding of U.S. constitutional and political development."
- Ken I. Kersch, Director, Boston College Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy
"Stephen Engel's elegant and deeply empirical account traces the history of political attacks on America's independent judiciary, showing how these attacks have evolved and provoked changes in both law and politics. His narrative deftly weaves constitutional development into political development, showing how we have gotten to today's political and politicized federal courts. This book is essential reading for those interested in the American courts. It also poses an unanswerable challenge to anyone who believes that America's national development can be understood without an account of the courts' place in it."
- Julie Novkov, SUNY Albany
"How is it that American courts could be such a regular target of political attack and yet remain so seemingly invulnerable to those attacks? Stephen Engel offers compelling evidence demonstrating that, far from seeking to destroy or eradicate the courts, politicians on both sides of the ideological divide have come to understand that the courts are a powerful tool. Their attacks are now crafted to push and pull the courts to serve the politicians' policy goals, rather than to block or undermine judicial power."
- Gordon Silverstein, University of California, Berkeley