E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Is the Roberts Court More Constitutionally Ambitious than the Warren Court?
Mark Tushnet
No, this isn't another post about the Affordable Care Act litigation. It's about the Court's decisionsearlier this week about the constitutional regulation of plea bargaining by means of the Sixth Amendment's requirement of effective (or not incompetent) assistance of counsel. Justice Kennedy's opinions emphasized the predominance of the resolution of criminal cases by pleas rather than through trials. Most of the Court's regulation of the criminal process has focused on the trial itself, with exclusionary rules the vehicle for influencing police conduct.
For me, the contrast between the plea-bargaining decisions and the Warren Court's decision in Terry v. Ohio is quite striking. In Terry Chief Justice Warren openly acknowledged the Court's inability to regulate the vast majority of police-citizen interactions through the exclusionary rule. The tools the courts had available, the Court said, were inadequate to the task of such regulation. Justice Scalia's dissent in the plea-bargaining points made the same assertion about the tools available to regulate plea bargaining. Justice Kennedy responded that over time the courts could be expected to develop a working toolkit for the problem. It's interesting to wonder how things might have worked out had the Warren Court taken the same approach to police-citizen interactions on the street.