Book Review: Are Class Actions Unconstitutional?

18 Pages Posted: 9 Mar 2011 Last revised: 10 Mar 2011

See all articles by Alexandra D. Lahav

Alexandra D. Lahav

University of Connecticut - School of Law

Date Written: March 9, 2011

Abstract

This is a book review of Martin Redish, Wholesale Justice: Constitutional Democracy and the Problem of the Class Action Lawsuit (Stanford U. Press, 2009).

In Wholesale Justice, Redish argues that class actions are unconstitutional and must be significantly reformed. The argument he presents is one that will surely be debated in courtrooms as well as classrooms and is especially significant given that the Supreme Court is hearing four major class action cases in the October 2010 term. After summarizing Redish's arguments, the review demonstrates that class actions are both constitutional and consistent with ideals of democratic accountability. In the end, the question is not whether the class action is constitutional (it is) but whether class actions are socially beneficial. This is a policy issue, not a constitutional one. Nevertheless, a broader point in Redish's book deserves serious attention. Too often procedures and remedies stealthily prevent the vindication of substantive rights. The appropriate solution to this accountability problem is a more robust public discussion of the relationship between rights and remedies.

Keywords: class actions, constitutional law, separation of powers, checks and balances, accountability, democracy

Suggested Citation

Lahav, Alexandra D., Book Review: Are Class Actions Unconstitutional? (March 9, 2011). Michigan Law Review, Vol. 109, p. 993, 2011, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1782066

Alexandra D. Lahav (Contact Author)

University of Connecticut - School of Law ( email )

65 Elizabeth Street
Hartford, CT 06105
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
129
Abstract Views
1,261
rank
272,258
PlumX Metrics