Professor Michael Gerhardt traces the rhetoric employed by national leaders and commentators over the past century to describe popular conceptions of the judicial function. In particular, Professor Gerhardt examines the evolution of the terminology used in popular and political rhetoric, revealing their inconsistent application to political ideologies through time. Professor Gerhardt argues that such shifts in usage correspond with transfers of power between the political authorities controlling the central interests at stake in constitutional adjudication. Professor Gerhardt applies the shortcomings of traditional political rhetoric to the issues surrounding technological advancements, concluding that the proper treatment of technology by the Supreme Court in the twenty-first century will require recognition of the complex consequences posed by these advances.

Publication Information

10 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 585-645 (2002)