Judicial review made courts seem reactionary fortresses to labor and reformers

Evidence

Cases such as these evoked, quite naturally, a good deal of liberal outrage. Labor groups and social reformers had struggled and lobbied for protective legislation. They learned soon enough that getting their programs through the legislature was not enough; it was like winning a battle, not like winning a war. Courts had the power to undo this legislation, sometimes on the flimsiest legal basis, sometimes, as in Godcharles, with apparently no basis at all. Out of these cases arose the reputation of courts as fortresses of dark and deep reaction. The court’s reputation as a stronghold of reaction did not turn around decisively, among liberals, until the late 1930s, or perhaps not until the days of the Warren court, in the 1950s. — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2099

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Judicial review’s deterrent fear may explain American labor’s non-militancy — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 3214; Judicial review’s main effect was deterring legislation, not voiding it — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2115

Broader Connections

• Judicial review’s deterrent fear may explain American labor’s non-militancy #expands (0.88) — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 3214
• Judicial review’s main effect was deterring legislation, not voiding it #complicates (0.78) — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2115