The Problem of Judicial Abdication

Clark Neily joins us for a discussion on judicial engagement and judicial abdication.

Previous Episode
The State of State Education in America
Next Episode
The Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium

Clark Neily joins us this week for a discussion on judicial engagement. Neily contrasts judges’ findings in cases with stringent standards of review—which he characterizes as a genuine quest for the truth from a truly neutral adjudicator, decided on the basis of evidence—with what he calls judicial abdication: the tendency of judges to default to a rational basis review of speculative justification by the government. They also discuss the right to earn a living, judicial activism, and the defining essence of the Constitution.

Show Notes and Further Reading

Clark Neily, Terms of Engagement: How Our Courts Should Enforce the Constitution’s Promise of Limited Government (book)

Timothy Sandefur, The Right to Earn a Living: Economic Freedom and the Law (book)

Clark Neily is on Twitter at @ConLawWarrior.