ABSTRACT
Statesmanship as a method of judging is celebrated for several reasons. Judicial statesmen are celebrated for their ability to articulate the broad ethical principles which should guide us in the decision making. Indeed, judges who decide cases as statesmen usurp lawmaking authority from the people and undermine the rule of law. More specifically, a Court of statesmen encourages an often all-too-willing Congress to abdicate its responsibility to decide what the law ought to be and whether that law is constitutional. Defenders of judicial statesmanship are sensitive to the charge that it is antidemocratic. Some try to explain that the values invoked by judicial statesmen are in fact rooted in the Constitution. Others argue that the people share the values invoked by judicial statesmen. The whole life of any historical view seems considerably longer than the whole life of a typical judicial statesman's commitment to a particular ground of decision.
