NCJ Number
125997
Journal
Journal of Crime and Justice Volume: 11 Issue: 1 Dated: (1988) Pages: 77-100
Date Published
1988
Length
24 pages
Annotation
The rhetoric and vocabulary that guide current debates over the role of the Supreme Court in judicial review reflect struggle between competing ideologies.
Abstract
Ideologies are preconscious explanations and rationale for guiding social action. In the political realm, ideologies provide the concepts and theories for policy, shape public discourse, and thus may become a form of rhetoric by which some groups attempt to pursuade others in the value of their ideas. Hence, ideologies become one instrument in political struggle; they embody power contests between competing world views, policies, and practices. In recent years, such a contest has occurred in the judicial realm, as legal fundamentalists have attempted to revise the history of Constitutional law as a means of implementing and solidifying political advantage. This paper examines "legal fundamentalism," as exemplified particularly by Attorney General Edwin Meese, as an example of how historical interpretations reflect new ideologies that in turn have become transformed into a form of political rhetoric. 37 references. (Author abstract)