A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism is the first truly interdisciplinary study of the American constitutional regime. Mark A. Graber explores the fundamental elements of the American constitutional order with particular emphasis on how constitutionalism in the United States is a form of politics and not a means of subordinating politics to law.

In this important book, fourteen of America's leading constitutional scholars assess the Supreme Court's performance expounding the animating principles of American constitutionalism. Essays devoted to fresh examination of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence with respect to the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Commerce Clause, federalism, the common law, international law and national sovereignty, separation of powers, fundamental rights, term limits, and constitutional criminal procedure. Other essays evaluate the work of the Court as 'republican school master, ' analyzing how the Court has articulated and affected the American people's capacity for self-government, the principle of the rule of law, the historic burden of racial injustice, respect for limited constitutional government, and the civilizational distinction between liberty and license. The Supreme Court and American Constitutionalism will be of great value to students and scholars of American constitutional studies, constitutional law, and American government

In an ere as morally confused as ours, Stoner argues, we at least ought to know what we've abandoned or suppressed in the name of judicial activism and the modern rights-oriented Constitution. Having lost our way, perhaps the common law, in its original sense, provides a way back, a viable alternative to the debilitating relativism of our current age.

Analysis of concurrent opinion writing by Supreme Court justices.

"Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism is a critical study of Justice Antonin Scalia's jurisprudence, his work on the U.S. Supreme Court, and his significance for an understanding of American constitutionalism. After tracing Scalia's emergence as a hero of the political right and his opposition to many of the decisions of the Warren Court, this book examines his general jurisprudential theory of originalism and textualism, arguing that he failed to produce either the objective method he claimed or the "correct" constitutional results he promised. Focusing on his judicial performance over his thirty years on the Court, the book examines his opinions on virtually all of the constitutional issues he addressed, from fundamentals of structure to most major constitutional provisions. The book argues that Scalia applied his jurisprudential theories in inconsistent ways and often ignored, twisted, or abandoned the interpretive methods he proclaimed, in most cases reaching results that were consistent with "conservative" politics and the ideology of the post-Reagan Republican Party. Most broadly, it argues that Scalia's jurisprudence and career are particularly significant because they exemplify-contrary to his own persistent claims-three paramount characteristics of American constitutionalism: the inherent inadequacy of "originalism" and other formal interpretive methodologies to produce "correct" answers to controverted constitutional questions; the relationship-particularly close in Scalia's case-between constitutional interpretations on one hand and substantive personal and political goals on the other; and the truly and unavoidably "living" nature of American constitutionalism itself. As a historical matter, the book concludes, Scalia stands as a towering figure of irony because his judicial career disproved the central claims of his own jurisprudence"--

"Constitutionalism in the United States is not determined solely by decisions made by the Supreme Court. Rather, a robust and meaningful understanding of American Constitutionalism requires a consideration of the historical and political context in which the Supreme Court delivers its rulings. With this premise as a point of departure, renowned legal scholars Howard Gillman, Mark A. Graber, and Keith E. Whittington move beyond traditional casebooks and take a refreshingly innovative approach to the study of Constitutional Law in American Constitutionalism Volumes I and II. Organized according to the standard two-semester Constitutional Law sequence, Volume I covers "Structures of Government" and Volume II covers "Rights and Liberties." Moreover, this text is offers a unique approach to its subject matter organizing the material within each volume according to historical era instead of the typical issues-based approach. Given the rapid pace of Supreme Court decisions, the landscape of Constitutionalism in the United States remains dynamic and fluid. As such, the new edition of American Constitutionalism Volumes I and II will include full coverage of major Supreme Court cases, decisions, and their political contexts through 2020, including coverage of the Obama and Trump administrations"--

Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism is an in-depth study of Justice Antonin Scalia's jurisprudence, his work on the Supreme Court, and his significance in the history of American constitutionalism. After tracing Scalia's rise to Associate Justice and his subsequent emergence as a hero of the Republican Party and the political right, this book reviews and criticizes his general jurisprudential theory, arguing that he failed to produce either the objective method he claimed or the correct constitutional results he promised. Focusing on his judicial performance over his thirty years on the Court, it examines his decisions and opinions on virtually all of the constitutional issues he addressed from the fundamentals of structure (federalism, separation of powers, and the Article III judicial power) to specific interpretations of most major constitutional provisions involving governmental powers and the rights of individuals under the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment. This book argues that Scalia applied his jurisprudential theories in inconsistent and contradictory ways and often ignored, distorted, or abandoned the interpretive methods he proclaimed to reach the results he sought, results that were aligned with and supported by the post-Reagan Republican coalition. Scalia was far more consistent in enforcing such ideologically compatible results than he was in following his proclaimed jurisprudential theories. Finally, assessing Scalia's historical significance, Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism argues that his jurisprudence and career are particularly illuminating because they exemplify--contrary to his persistent claims--three paramount characteristics of American constitutionalism: the inherent inadequacy of originalism and other formal interpretive methodologies to produce consistent and correct answers to controverted constitutional questions; the close relationship that exists, particularly so in Scalia's case, between constitutional theories and interpretations on one hand and substantive political goals and values on the other; and the unavoidably living nature of American constitutionalism itself. All in all, Scalia stands as a towering figure of irony because his judicial career deconstructed the central claims of his own jurisprudence.