Article by B. S. Nikiforov
The judicial activity of the Supreme Court of the United States is inherently political in character. On the one hand, the general provisions of the Constitution of the United States, which was adopted about 200 years ago and which reflects the spirit of that past era, are highly grandiloquent but imprecise. As a direct result of this factor, any attempt at the present time to interpret these provisions in light of events that are far removed from the setting against which they were adopted necessarily involves the injection of a concrete meaning into them. It is self-evident that this new [judicially designed] content is not politically neutral, because in the process of interpreting a constitution, it is necessary to resort to its provisions "read in their historical setting as revealing the purpose of its framers, and search for admissible meanings of its words which, in the circumstances of their application, will effectuate those purposes." American researcher D. Karlen, translating this cautious language into laymen's terms, emphasizes the point that in the activities of the Supreme Court "precedent assumes a secondary role in the face of considerations of contemporary politics."
About the Author
B. S. Nikiforov. LL.D., Chairman of a Section, Institute of the USA and Canada of the USSR Academy of Sciences.
Citation
53 Tul. L. Rev. 720 (1979)