Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court Is not a Court and Its Justices are Not Judges

I engage with the author of this book on Twitter and at Dorf on Law and his concerns over the power and lack of openness of the Supreme Court is well taken. But, his reasoning is flawed, particularly since (except for a somewhat exaggerated matter of discretion) other courts have the same criteria he cites (e.g., using policy reasons, not merely text and precedent). And, it's just focused on constitutional matters anyway, and not even a range of criminal justice issues (since courts have more cause to claim special knowledge). Finally, he doesn't even really provide the other side. For instance, Footnote 4 is not even referenced. Ultimately, it is a "court," but we need to understand what that means in practice.

Also: Brown v. Bd. is cited as an exception but it wasn't really at the time. And, I think a good case can be made (especially given practice) abortion rights, e.g., are clearly protected by text too. If one is required for equal protection, so is the other.