Useful Instrument of Government
Defending Advisory Opinions
Defenses of advisory opinions came only after the attacks, and after the advising justices developed restrictions on advising. Surprisingly, the defenses have rarely responded to the attacks, largely ignoring such challenges as separation of powers and due process. This chapter discusses the chief defenses, including advisory opinions as a remedy for the purported delay and inefficiency of judicial review. This issue made a national appearance during the New Deal era, when several proposals were introduced in Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution to require the U.S. Supreme Court to give advisory opinions, to stop New Deal legislation from being declared unconstitutional after being enacted and put into effect, as had happened several times. Other defenses discussed include the expertise of the judges and interbranch cooperation, a major principle of the Progressive era, whose intellectual leaders downplayed constitutional values such as separation of powers.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.