Overview

What was the intended purpose and function of the Bill of Rights? Is the modern understanding of the Bill of Rights the same as that which prevailed when the document was ratified? In Limited Government and the Bill of Rights, Patrick Garry addresses these questions. Under the popular modern view, the Bill of Rights focuses primarily on protecting individual autonomy interests, making it all about the individual. But in Garry's novel approach, one that tries to address the criticisms of judicial activism that have resulted from the Supreme Court's contemporary individual rights jurisprudence, the Bill of Rights is all about government - about limiting the power of government. In this respect, the Bill of Rights is consistent with the overall scheme of the original Constitution, insofar as it sought to define and limit the power of the newly created federal government.               Garry recognizes the desire of the constitutional framers to protect individual liberties and natural rights, indeed, a recognition of such rights had formed the basis of the American campaign for independence from Britain. However, because the constitutional framers did not have a clear idea of how to define natural rights, much less incorporate them into a written constitution for enforcement, they framed the Bill of Rights as limited government provisions rather than as individual autonomy provisions. To the framers, limited government was the constitutional path to the maintenance of liberty. Moreover, crafting the Bill of Rights as limited government provisions would not give the judiciary the kind of wide-ranging power needed to define and enforce individual autonomy.               With respect to the application of this limited government model, Garry focuses specifically on the First Amendment and examines how the courts in many respects have already used a limited government model in their First Amendment decision-making. As he discusses, this approach to the First Amendment may allow for a more objective and restrained judicial role than is often applied under contemporary First Amendment jurisprudence.               Limited Government and the Bill of Rights will appeal to anyone interested in the historical background of the Bill of Rights and how its provisions should be applied to contemporary cases, particularly First Amendment cases. It presents an innovativetheory about the constitutional connection between the principle of limited government and the provisions in the Bill of Rights.

Full Product Details

9780826219718

Table of Contents

Reviews

<p> The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry's somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy--especially the academy's vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of 'rights law' that secures an expansive protection of 'personal autonomy.' --Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders' Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere 'parchment barriers, ' the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others--the Court's 'double standard' when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. --John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Conte

The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry's somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy--especially the academy's vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of 'rights law' that secures an expansive protection of 'personal autonomy.' --Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders' Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere 'parchment barriers, ' the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others--the Court's 'double standard' when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. --John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry's somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy--especially the academy's vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of 'rights law' that secures an expansive protection of 'personal autonomy.' --Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders' Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere 'parchment barriers, ' the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others--the Court's 'double standard' when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. --John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry s somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy especially the academy s vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of rights law that secures an expansive protection of personal autonomy. Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere parchment barriers, the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others the Court's double standard when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America -The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights.---Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry's somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy--especially the academy's vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of 'rights law' that secures an expansive protection of 'personal autonomy.' --Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders' Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere 'parchment barriers, ' the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others--the Court's 'double standard' when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. --John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties

<p><p> The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. --Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties <p> This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry's somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy--especially the academy's vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of 'rights law' that secures an expansive protection of 'personal autonomy.' --Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders' Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere 'parchment barriers, ' the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others--the Court's 'double standard' when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. --John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America <p>

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 The great contribution of Limited Government and the Bill of Rights is to conceive what the Bill might look like if courts were to treat its guarantees as provisions limiting the scope of governmental power. Garry displays a wide command of prior scholarly work that is quite impressive. His entire book is an ambitious exercise that pushes the boundaries of the conversation about the function and content of the individual rights provisions of the Bill of Rights. Calvin R. Massey, author of American Constitutional Law: Powers and Liberties This is a stimulating and quite interesting book. It contains a significant amount of careful description and analysis of the text, history, and modern precedent relating to the Bill of Rights, much of which I found both interesting and persuasive. I share Professor Garry s somewhat skeptical view of what is quite popular in the legal academy especially the academy s vigorous defense of an expansive, activist role for the Supreme Court to the end of developing a body of rights law that secures an expansive protection of personal autonomy. Thomas McAffee, author of Inherent Rights, the Written Constitution, and Popular Sovereignty: The Founders Understanding In his book, Patrick Garry correctly argues that the Framers sought chiefly to preserve liberty through limiting government rather than through listing individual rights (in addition to expressing reservations about mere parchment barriers, the authors of The Federalist argued that the entire Constitution was a Bill of Rights), and I share his concern that modern interpretations of the Bill of Rights arguably over empower federal judges and end up privileging some parts of the Constitution over others the Court's double standard when it comes to provisions in the Bill of Rights and structural features is well known. John Vile, co-author of Constitutional Law in Contemporary America

Author Information

Patrick M. Garry is Professor of Law and Director of the Hagemann Center for Legal & Public Policy Researchat the University of South Dakota School of Law in Vermillion, South Dakota. He is the author of numerous books, including Wrestling With God: The Courts' Tortuous Treatment of Religion and Rediscovering a Lost Freedom: The First Amendment Right to Censor Unwanted Speech.

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available