Recalibrating Reform

Some of the most important eras of reform in US history reveal a troubling pattern: often reform is compromised after the initial legislative and judicial victories have been achieved. Thus Jim Crow racial exclusions followed Reconstruction; employer prerogatives resurged after the passage of the Wagner Act in 1935; and after the civil rights reforms of the mid-twentieth century, principles of color-blindness remain dominant in key areas of constitutional law that allow structural racial inequalities to remain hidden or unaddressed. When momentous reforms occur, certain institutions and legal rights will survive the disruption and remain intact, just in different forms. Thus governance in the post-reform period reflects a systematic recalibration or reshaping of the earlier reforms as a result of the continuing influence and power of such resilient institutions and rights. Recalibrating Reform examines this issue and demonstrates the pivotal role of the Supreme Court in post-reform recalibration.

'We celebrate great moments of legal change but fail to pay enough attention to the end of reform. Chinn's superb book challenges us all to rethink how courts apply, adjust, and sometimes frustrate landmark achievements of the people.' Robert L. Tsai, American University, Washington DC, 'A remarkable and highly original book. Looking across the span of American history, Chinn identifies a recurring mismatch between major policy changes and their consequences: transformative legal and political decisions repeatedly result in substantially less-than-transformative governing arrangements. Chinn's innovative analysis will alter how scholars think about patterns of American political development and the significance of judicial power.' Keith J. Bybee, Paul E. and Hon. Joanne F. Alper '72 Judiciary Studies Professor, Syracuse University, New York, 'How do constitutional revolutions end? Chinn puts the spotlight on this much-neglected question and provides a penetrating set of answers that set a new agenda in both law and political science.' Bruce Ackerman, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale University, Connecticut, 'This ambitious book makes a substantial contribution to our understanding of the role of the Supreme Court in American political development. Stuart Chinn has given us our first sustained exploration of the institutional dynamics of retrenchment and accommodation between old and new and conservative and liberal legal-constitutional orders. With great synthetic power and brilliant narrative detail, Chinn shows us how the court recurrently steps in to manage these clashes and fashion the new rules of the game.' William E. Forbath, Lloyd M. Bentsen Chair in Law and Professor of History, University of Texas, Austin, 'Drawing on often opposed theories of judicial behavior and extensive historical research, Recalibrating Reform contends forcefully that judges, even the reform minded, are institutionally conditioned to resist major legal transformations - and so major political transformations. This convincing argument will influence scholars of judicial behavior and American constitutional development for years to come.' Rogers M. Smith, Christopher H. Browne Distinguished Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania

Stuart Chinn is an assistant professor at the University of Oregon School of Law. He received his BA, PhD (political science) and JD degrees from Yale University, Connecticut. Previously, he was a visiting assistant professor at the University of Texas School of Law. His research and teaching interests are in constitutional law, constitutional theory, legislation, and legal and political history. He has published in the journals Law and Social Inquiry, The Journal of Law, and Polity, and has a book chapter in the edited volume Living Legislation (2012).