Nixon's Court

His Challenge to Judicial Liberalism and Its Political Consequences

Most analysts have deemed Richard Nixon's challenge to the judicial liberalism of the Warren Supreme Court a failure – "a counterrevolution that wasn't".Nixon's Court" offers an alternative assessment. Kevin J. McMahon reveals a Nixon whose public rhetoric was more conservative than his administration's actions and whose policy towards the Court was more subtle than previously recognized. Viewing Nixon's judicial strategy as part political and part legal, McMahon argues that Nixon succeeded substantially on both counts.

Many of the issues dear to social conservatives, such as abortion and school prayer, were not nearly as important to Nixon. Consequently, his nominations for the Supreme Court were chosen primarily to advance his "law and order" and school desegregation agendas – agendas the Court eventually endorsed. But there were also political motivations to Nixon's approach: he wanted his judicial policy to be conservative enough to attract white southerners and northern white ethnics disgruntled with the Democratic party but not so conservative as to drive away moderates in his own party. In essence, then, he used his criticisms of the Court to speak to members of his "Silent Majority" in hopes of disrupting the long-dominant New Deal Democratic coalition.

For McMahon, Nixon's judicial strategy succeeded not only in shaping the course of constitutional law in the areas he most desired but also in laying the foundation of an electoral alliance that would dominate presidential politics for a generation.

Reviews

"This book is fascinating, original, and important. It adds a rich case study to the regime politics literature that claims politicians use courts to advance their electoral and policy aims. McMahon deploys multiple sources of evidence to reveal how Nixon shifted the Supreme Court to the right on school desegregation and law and order as a successful electoral strategy, bringing white southerners and ethnic Catholics into the Republican fold and profoundly reshaping American politics" – Terri Peretti, Santa Clara University

"'Nixon's Court' will attract a lot of attention and set the record straight in some important areas. The Nixon Court may have been 'a counterrevolution that wasn't', but McMahon demonstrates that this should not be considered a failure on Nixon's part, but consistent with his stated objectives" – Ken I. Kersch, Boston College

"Kevin McMahon, who revealed how New Dealers shaped a Supreme Court open to the civil rights movement, now shows how Richard Nixon used the Court to divide Democrats and open the way for a new conservative coalition. But today's conservatives still seek to push the Court further to the right – so the battle Nixon began continues in the age of Obama and may determine its fate" – Rogers M. Smith, University of Pennsylvania

"Kevin McMahon's skills at archival research, statistical analysis, and constitutional law analysis combine here into a superlative account of Nixon's judicial strategy, its impact on the Court, and the corresponding implications of Court decisions on his political fortunes. McMahon's work will force a reconsideration of Nixon's political strategy and will broaden the focus beyond the simplistic 'Southern Strategy' explanations to a consideration of all components of Nixon's New American Majority. All students of the presidency will benefit from a close reading of this work" – Richard M. Pious, author of "Why Presidents Fail"

"Emphasizing Richard Nixon's use of the power to nominate Supreme Court justices and his articulation of constitutional views as an electoral strategy rather than an ideological one, 'Nixon's Court' provides a powerful account of why the Burger Court was less conservative than many hoped (and feared) it would be. Kevin McMahon's important argument connecting presidential electoral concerns to developments in constitutional law makes clear some previously obscured facets of the Supreme Court's work in the late twentieth century" – Mark Tushnet, Harvard Law School

"In this utterly engaging book, Kevin McMahon argues that Richard Nixon's judicial strategy, and Nixon himself, have been misunderstood. Nixon's actual ideology was more moderate than his public rhetoric implied; his concerns about the judiciary extended beyond the legal and into the electoral; and his record, properly understood, proved more auspicious than others have credited him. This important book will force scholars to rethink not only Nixon's presidency, but also the very criteria upon which they categorize all presidents' successes and failures" – William G. Howell, University of Chicago

Back to the list of books