Mark Pulliam misunderstands the antagonisms that underlay section 501(c)(3) and still undergird a host of other speech restrictions.
Over the past century, there has been a sharp debate over judicial review and, more generally, over the role of judges. Do the judges really have a power over constitutional questions? And can they really exercise will in the pursuit of this power? In this installment of Liberty Forum, Philip Hamburger recovers the common-law meaning of judicial office or duty, distinguishes it from the contemporary understanding of judicial review, and explains its importance for the preservation of liberty.
Philip Hamburger is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. He is a scholar of constitutional law and its history, and his publications include Separation of Church and State (Harvard 2002), Law and Judicial Duty (Harvard 2008), Is Administrative Law Unlawful? (Chicago 2014), and numerous articles. Before coming to Columbia, he was the John P. Wilson Professor at the University of Chicago Law School. He also has taught at George Washington University Law School, Northwestern Law School, University of Virginia Law School, and the University of Connecticut Law School.