In 1921, long before Felix Frankfurter became a judge, he said, The simple fact of the matter is that . .. the [Supreme] Court, under the guise of legal form, exercises political control.' However radical this view may have seemed at the time, sixty years later it had become something of a commonplace, thanks largely to the Warren Court. Judges had pushed beyond desegregation to integration via busing; they had undertaken to reapportion legislatures, to provide a detailed abortion code, to supervise police investigations, to outlaw capital punishment in effect and then to reinstate it with limitations, to supervise the supervision of children in their schools, to manage prison and mental institutions, to regulate private employment practices, to oversee any number of welfare programs, to direct credit policies of banks and credit-card companies, to monitor environmental quality, and even to supervise municipal land-use planning-all in the name of interpreting the Constitution!2 That was make-believe. One of the dynamic movements in modern jurisprudence is led by avant-garde liberals whose formative years coincided with the enlightenment that Chief Justice Earl Warren inspired. Bemused by his sense of fairness, these so-called noninterpretists are too sophisticated to accept his simple-minded methodology. What they want is Warrenesque government by judges without Warrenesque make-believe. They want, for example, contraception and abortion privacy without the pretense that it comes from the Constitution. As one of their gifted leaders put it, they reject the Courts resort to bad legislative history and strained reading of the constitutional language to support