counts, he is “not convinced” of the validity of the Court’s pretensions, and why therefore the Court, in its current role, cannot expect to enjoy the community’s confidence, he lets the argument drop. Where one would have expected to find an invitation to other branches of government to begin to discharge their duties as coexpounders of the Constitution and so redress the balance, modulation again takes over and the book closes with a plea for “judicial restraint.”
Still, Hyneman has given us plenty to work on, and perhaps his caution has been well advised after all. The way things are going, it may be that he could not have carried the argument much further without being castigated as an “extremist” or accused of wanting to impeach Earl Warren.
Comments