Political foundations of judicial supremacy1. The politics of constitutional meaninga. The constitution remains a source of determinate answers to even our hardest political questions.b. The American judiciary has been able to win the authority to independently interpret the constitution because recognizing such an authority has been politically beneficial to others.c. Relative judicial independence and authority can help elected political officials overcomea variety of political dilemmas that they routinely encounter.i. In particular the authority of the federal judiciary is rooted in concerns for political success and coalition maintenance and the complications for political action created by the American constitutional system.d. The judiciary has been able to retain its power mainly because when other political actors had reasons of their own to recognize such power, and it serves their best interest.2. The construction of constitutional regimesa. Reconstructive presidents slowly change the court to become aligned with their particular views. They do not undermine the courts when a bad decision is passed down, but instead embrace it and change the court by appointing new judges that are aligned with the presidents party. FDR is an example of a reconstructive president. 3. The reconstruction of judicial authority a. Presidents assert greater authority to interpret the constitution, and correspondingly attempt to diplace the authority of the courts to do the same, when they seek to reconstruct the inherited constitutional regime.b. The reconstructive leder must establish his own warrants to say what the constitutional law is, and that requires supplanting competing interpreters.c. Judges can help the affiliated leader manage his leadership task, and as a consequence politicians have an interest in recognizing and building judicial authority d. Judgs can take action on the shared agenda with the established regime hile reducing pressure on coalition leaders.e. The judiciary is an alternate policy making resource for affiliated leaders that can be used to advance and secure constitutional commitmentsf. The politics of affiliation creates a supportive environment forjudicial activism, and judges often seize that opportunity to advance their own substantive goals.g. The Roosevelt reconstruction was particularly concerned with vindicating the rights of labor to organize the workplace in pursuit of a form of industrial democracy, and of course the justices played an important role in facilitating that effort, including through the re-working of free speech doctrine to provide constitutional protection to labor picketing h. When elected officials cannot act on their own because they have insufficient electoral and legislative support, judges may be tempted or invited to step ini. Judicial activism in the context of the politics of affiliation reflects a blend of ambition onthe part of judges and stratagem on the part of elected officialsj. The courts willingness to strike down legislation does not evidence the judiciary’s existence outside of politics so much as it point out the complicated role the court has inpolitics.4. The judiciary in the politics of oppositiona. Oppositional presidents to the court merely preemp a continuing partisan and political order. Such oppositional candidates may manage to win election, but they come to officewith relatively little authority and few resources with which to increase their authority.b. The regime they oppose is still vibrant,popular, and resilient to pressure. Such presidentsmust learn to accommodate themselves to the dominant regime in order to be successful c. The elevation of a member of the partisan opposition to the presidency does not necessarily mean the beginning of a reconstruction period.d. Instead they must operate within the established constitutional regime, while perhaps seeking ways to reform it.e. For preemptive presidents, who often find themselves at odds with congress and standing on a fragile electoral base, picking fights with the judiciary would be self defeating.f. Rather than challenging the leadership of the court, these preemptive presidents have embraced the courts while slowly replacing justices and in turn adding to the judicial supremacy.CASES- Cooper v. Aaron- Baker v. Carr- US v. Nixon- City of Boerne v. Flores- Planned parenthood v. casey- Marbury v. Madison- Brown v.