not have the power to develop necessary policy and implement decisions that could affect significant reform. Because, as Alexander Hamilton put it, the Court controls neither the sword (Executive branch) nor the purse (Legislative branch), it must rely on cooperation from the other two branches in order to enforce its decisions. This Constraint can be overcome either by securing support of citizens or at least not having significant opposition from all citizens. Empirical studies Rosenberg maintains that the efforts made by women's rights, pro-choice, and civil rights activists to use the courts to produce social change have not been very effective. To prove and support this claim, he examines a great deal of statistical information. In looking at the effects that Brown v. Board had on desegregation, for example, Rosenberg looks at the percentage of black schoolchildren attending mixed schools in the South in the years preceding this landmark decision, and the years following it. He finds that almost no measurable change had occurred in the ten years following this decision. Indeed, it is not until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that the percentage begins to increase annually. Similarly, in looking at Roe v. Wade, he finds that the annual number of legal abortions did not seem to be greatly affected by the Court's decision. Criticism There is a great deal of criticism leveled at The Hollow Hope. Critics maintain that Rosenberg's argument ignores the implications of court decisions on future actions that created more direct change. Critics see similar omissions in discussion of Martin Luther King Jr., who cited Brown v. Board as a reason for mobilizing his followers in a speech given on a night preceding a boycott. Conceding that Rosenberg presents a provocative if flawed argument against the conventional wisdom that the United States Supreme Court is a powerful judicial body capable of introducing significant change, these same critics maintain that Rosenberg relies on faulty assumptions, such as the duality of man. See also judicial activism regulation through litigation References External links A book review in JSTOR The American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No. 3 (Sep., 1992), pp. 812–813. 1991 non-fiction books Law books