At 2:00 pm, on Friday, October 23, 1987, the United States Senate committed what many considered then – and what many still consider today – to be an unforgivable political and constitutional sin. Wielding their power to advise and consent on presidential nominations to the federal courts, the members of the upper house voted 58–42 not to confirm Judge Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court of the United States, the post for which President Ronald Reagan had nominated him nearly four months earlier. The vote, which was the largest margin of defeat in history for a nominee to the Supreme Court, concluded one of the most tumultuous political battles in the history of the republic.

The Senators perhaps had every reason to believe that that would be the end of the story. However ugly it had been, however much time it had taken, Judge Bork's defeat was only one more routine sacrifice to partisan politics. But time would prove wrong anyone who actually thought that. The unprecedented vote against his confirmation reflected something far more fundamental than an ordinary partisan standoff. The battle over Bork was politically transformative, its constitutional lessons enduring.