The Hollow Hope Chapter Summary

The Hollow Hope examines the following research question: when can judicial processes be used to produce social change? (Rosenberg 1). Rosenberg starts out the book by describing the two different theories of the courts. The first theory, the Dynamic Court view, views the court as being powerful, vigorous, and potent proponents of change (Rosenberg 1). The second theory, the Constrained Court view, views the court in the complete opposite way. With this view the court is seen as weak, ineffective, and powerless (Rosenberg 3). In this view there are three different constraints that restrict the courts from producing effective political and social change. These constraints include: limited nature of constitutional rights, lack of judicial independence, and the lack of tools the courts need (Rosenberg 35). Even though there are constraints on the court there are conditions where the court is able to overcome the constraints.

They were able to obtain civil unions but were still denied a majority of the rights that come with marriage. The surveys and polls that Rosenberg analyzed, shows that public opinion was still a little hesitant about same sex marriage (Rosenberg 418). Conversely, the polls showed that people were more accepting of civil unions (Rosenberg 418). Rosenberg then goes on to state that had the activists gone to the court with civil unions and then waited for public opinion to be more in favor of same sex marriage to then proceed with equal rights, they may have had a better chance (Rosenberg 419). There is no way to know for sure if this would have been the case because we are not able to simulate a new world or go back in time. However, with the evidence that Rosenberg has shown it makes sense that since the activists did not have the support of the elites or the support of public opinion, they were not able to produce the change that they had hoped