They say the Warren Court (1953-1969) was the most liberal Supreme Court in US history. I don't know. They weren't THAT liberal. They always had a slim majority of Republicans. And Miranda rights and the right to legal counsel? Are those really so liberal? The US Constitution is just a very liberal document. Accept it. But one thing they did that wasn't so liberal, as it turns out, was expand definition of the Commerce Clause in the Constitution. This allowed for the disastrous war on drug we still have today. Thank you Warren Court.
I've been debating whether or not to give your post oxygen by responding to it, or letting your disinformation stand unchallenged. Yes indeed, if we accept the usual U.S. definition of liberal, the Warren Court was the most liberal in history. The U.S. Constitution became liberal because of its decisions: desegregation (Brown v. Board of Education); civil rights, voting rights; banning prayer in schools; the right to privacy; one man,one vote in reapportioning legislative districts; protection against unreasonable search and seizures; incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment so that it applies to the states--what more do you want? Yes, the Miranda warnings were really so liberal. The Constitution says nothing about them. For the most part that "very liberal document" was ambiguous about them until the Warren Court filled in the blanks. What other court in U.S. history do you think had a record even close to that? That commerce clause you're complaining provided the constitutional basis for the Civil Rights Act of 1964! The fact that it facilitated the war on drugs by enhancing federal regulatory power in general is incidental to the role Uncle Sam as a regulator, which became the basis for environmental legislation later. Warren, himself, was a Republican. So what? Did that make him a conservative?
