The myth of Warren Court activism

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Megan F.en_US
dc.contributor.committeeChairKessler, Mark
dc.contributor.committeeMemberRobb, Jeffrey
dc.contributor.committeeMemberTravis, Paul D.
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-04T18:54:16Z
dc.date.available2014-04-04T18:54:16Z
dc.date.copyright2013en_US
dc.date.issued1/1/2013en_US
dc.description.abstractJudicial activism and the Warren Court became synonymous, in the 1980's, with the rise of originalism. However, the first time the term, judicial activism, was employed it was applied to the Hughes Court. This thesis compares the two Courts to determine if the originalist labeling of the Warren Court as an activist court is appropriate. The evidence presented in this thesis demonstrates that judicial activism is a term that fails to capture the inherent complexities found in the interpretation of constitutional law when applied to either Court. It further suggests that originalism, as a jurisprudential theory, would be capable of producing the same type of results oriented decisions that originalists accused the Warren Court rendering.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11274/322
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectSocial sciences
dc.subjectJudicial activism
dc.subjectOriginalism
dc.titleThe myth of Warren Court activismen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
thesis.degree.departmentHistory and Government
thesis.degree.grantorTexas Woman's University
thesis.degree.levelMaster
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Arts

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2013JohnsonOCR.pdf
Size:
1.04 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

Collections

History