Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000

Book Description

Many on both sides of the political fence were mystified by, and in some cases, furious at, the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. While legal columnists lined up to decry the court's decision in the days following its ruling, nobody has explained the decision in the context of the court's history of dealing with politically-charged cases, and nobody has looked in detail at how the individual justice's previous writings were or were not reflected in the ruling. In 'Supreme Injustice', Alan Dershowitz will approach the ruling systematically from historical, political , and legal grounds. His ultimate conclusion will be that the Supreme Court did more damage to itself than is apparent now, creating a disturbing precedent that will come back to haunt it, and sullying its and the American judicial system's reputation for fairness at home and abroad. He will also speculate as to why the Court ruled as it did and explore the myriad consequences of the decision. Alan Dershowitz is famous for explaining complicated legal concepts in a serious but accessible style, both in his Harvard Law School criminal law class and in his numerous books. 'Supreme Injustice', written in this characteristic style, will be published, in all likelihood, in a period where the 'spirit of bipartisanship' currently celebrated by politicians and the media will almost assuredly have begun to wear off, and in which we may have established with some certainty that Al Gore won Florida. It's likely that this combination of events will leave many who disagreed with the ruling looking for a thoughtful explanation of how and why it happened, and it's our belief that they will turn to this book.

Download Description

Millions of Americans were baffled and outraged by the U.S. Supreme Court's role in ending the presidential election of 2000 with its controversial ruling in Bush v. Gore. The Court had held a unique place in our system of checks and balances, and was seen as the embodiment of fairness and principle precisely because it was perceived to be above the political fray. How could it issue decisions that reeked of partisan politics, and send to the White House a candidate who, for all it knew at the time, may have actually lost the election? In Supreme Injustice, bestselling author and legal expert Alan M. Dershowitz addresses these questions head-on, at last demystifying Bush v. Gore for those who are still angered by the court's decision but unclear about its meaning.

Customer Reviews:

Book review.......2005-09-12

My order was processed in an acceptable amount of time. Book was in condition as advertised.

He makes it interesting.......2005-08-06

Dershowitz makes this potentially dry subject very interesting, while remaining credible. Although I went into the book agreeing with the author, the book got me angry all over again. I'd guess that even those who wanted a Bush presidency would find much of the information in this book interesting.

Digital Version of Supreme Injustice, Alan Dershowitz.......2004-12-18

The biggest dissapointment I had with getting this book is that I purchased the Microsoft Reader Version. One is led to believe that one can highlight, cut and paste, etc., by using this new tool for reading. Actually, all you get is electronic pages that are inert. They cannot be printed, one cannot cut and paste from them, all one can do is stare at them on the screen. In order to transfer the print from screen to one's computer, one must first copy (by hand) the print, re-type it on screen into another program, then save. In other words, the e-version, for the researcher is not only ABSOLUTELY USELESS, it DOUBLES THE AMOUNT OF WORK ONE MUST DO TO EXCERPT MATERIAL FROM A BOOK.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT KIND OF PERSON MICROSOFT HAD IN MIND WHEN THEY CREATED THIS INFLEXIBLE PRODUCT. IT IS CERTAINLY A DISASTER FOR ME, AND I INTEND TO REQUEST A REFUND ON MY "DIGITAL PURCHASE" SINCE ALL I PURCHASED WAS AN INERT, DOUBLE-THE-WORK TO READ AND EXCERPT BOOK. WHAT A DISASTER! WHAT AN UNMITIGATED DISASTER. IT SORT OF MAKES ONE WONDER WHY THEY EVEN WENT TO THE TROUBLE TO CREATE THIS PRODUCT.

Explains the damage done to American justice in this case.......2004-10-18

For those who do not know the story, the American Presidential election in 2000 was very close. Democrat Al Gore received more popular votes than Republican George W Bush, but such elections are decided state by state, and the winner in Florida was to determine who would be President. In Florida, more voters intended to vote for Gore than for Bush, but due to several irregularities, the vote was very close. Close enough to require a mandatory recount. Close enough so that either candidate could ask for a hand count of disputed ballots.

As it turned out, a complete recount of all ballots would have confirmed that Gore had won. According to Florida law, such a recount should have been performed. When a recount got under way, it grew increasingly clear that Gore might well win. However, the Republican strategy (in a state where Bush's brother was the governor) was to refuse a recount or to delay any recount until the Presidential winner had to be announced. If the Democrats protested, they would take the case to court. To the Supreme Court. And if they lost that case, they would simply have the Florida legislature declare Bush the winner of the state. Either way, Bush would win an illegitimate victory.

Given that the initial count favored Bush, a Republican victory could not be prevented. And even in the unlikely event that a complete hand count (including "overvotes") favored Bush, neutral observers would still note that a plurality of the Florida voters had tried to vote for Gore, and that Florida law was to favor the clear intent of the voters. So the illegitimacy of the result was inevitable no matter how the hand count came out. The only question was where the blame would rest. Would it be on those in Florida who delayed the count? On the Florida legislature? On the Florida Courts? Or on the Supreme Court?

Dershowitz explains how the blame wound up being applied, quite accurately, to the Supreme Court, which took a case and judged it purely on a partisan basis. And he explains what the result of this mischief will be. First, unlike a miscarriage of justice in a criminal case, which might get blamed on the jurors, the Supreme Court judges are there for life. They'll be considered untrustworthy by a huge number of people for the rest of their lives, and that will make the Supreme Court less credible as long as any of them remain on it. Dershowitz also says that it will call into much greater question the entire process by which Supreme Court judges are selected. And of course, this entire affair has exposed the absurdities of our voting system to the world, which regards us with less esteem as a result.

Many Americans were annoyed with the Supreme Court simply because it picked someone other than the person they voted for. Others were angry because it picked the loser rather than the winner. However, Dershowitz is more concerned with the Supreme Court having showed partisanship at all, especially in a manner that threatens the carefully established checks and balances among branches of government so carefully laid out in our Constitution.

Finally, Dershowitz reminds us that the authority of the Supreme Court "rests on public acceptance of its status as a nonpartisan arbiter of law." Judicial integrity gets built up slowly and in this case was squandered quickly. This book does an excellent job of showing just how dismally the Supreme Court performed here.

U.S. Supreme Court Saved America from Civil War!.......2004-06-14

U.S. Supreme Court Saved America from Civil War!
The USA Supreme Court saved America. The USA Constitution saved America from chaos, instalbiliy.

The Constitution created three distinct branches of government with "check and balaces". The "legislative", "executive", "judicial" are vested in three seperate branches of government.... and yet Presidents appoint Judges, the Senate can veto Presidential treaties, Congress can override the Presidents veto on a bill....

That how it is supposed to work. Each of the three branches is distinct, seperate, and yet still exercise power over the other.

The USA Supreme Court stepped in to stop the endless recount and saved America from a Civil War. The Supreme Court did the job it was supposed to. The Supreme Court did the job given by the Constitution.

THOSE CAN DO WILL DO, THOSE CANNOT DO WILL TEACH.

Dershowitz is an academic, with tenure, of course, job for life, until he drops dead. Academic never have to work, compete, produce goods, services like in the real world.

If this know-it-all is so smart, why doesn't he run for Congress or President.

Book Description

Filing a small claims case allows you to have the court determine your legal rights in cases of up to $5,000. However, a new court rule forbids judges to explain your legal rights, and without this knowledge you can lose your case. How to Win in Small Claims Court in Florida simplifies and thoroughly explains everything you need to know to successfully handle your own small claims case, whether you are the plaintiff or defendant. Complete with court terminology, step-by-step instructions and the forms you need, this book makes filing or defending suits in small claims court inexpensive and hassle-free. This Book Explains in Simple Language: Whether you have a valid case Rules of evidence How to file your case Using expert witnesses Arguing your case Following rules of evidence Defending your case Collecting your judgment Settling your case Garnishing wages Countersuing

The Votes That Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election

Average customer rating:

Fine academic look at...
Fast Production, Disappointing Results
Very good reporting, but poor editing
Time to read it again
Not Biased?

The Votes That Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election
Howard Gillman
Manufacturer: University Of Chicago Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Elections | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 0226294072

Book Description

The dramatic struggle over the outcome of the 2000 presidential election presented judges with an extraordinary political challenge, as well as a historic political temptation. In The Votes That Counted Howard Gillman offers a comprehensive yet critical assessment of how well courts coped with the competing expectations for impartial justice and favorable partisan results.

Lively and authoritative, the book documents how the participants, the press, the academic community, and the public responded during these tension-filled thirty-six days. Gillman also provides a serious yet accessible overview of the legal strategies and debates-from briefs and oral arguments to final decisions. However, in explaining the behavior of courts, he moves beyond an analysis of law to also take into account the influences of partisanship, judicial ideology, and broader political and historical contexts.

Appropriately, Gillman pays special attention to the judges whose behavior generated the most controversy—the battling justices of the Florida and United States Supreme Courts. After carefully reviewing the arguments for and against their decisions, he concludes that the five justices behind the Bush v. Gore decision acted outside what should be considered the acceptable boundaries of judicial power. Gillman ends with an analysis of why they chose such an unprecedented course of action and an assessment of whether their partisan intervention will have any lasting effect on the Supreme Court's reputation and authority.

Customer Reviews:

Fine academic look at..........2005-07-14

the outcome of 2000 election and how America got there. The book chronologically relives the legal battles in courts by pro-Bush and pro-Gore forcs culminating with a 5-4 Supreme Court rulings overturning Florida's Supreme Court. Well written and well researched. If after reading the book you are still sincerely convinced that Bush v. Gore (I) and (II) were legally sound decisions, I would recommend another book: "The Attitudial Model (Revised)" by Segal and Spaeth.

Fast Production, Disappointing Results.......2003-08-13

The book is definitely biased, as the author admits. Some biased books are OK, but this one is really one-sided and employs such irrational discourse that you wonder how they accepted it as "academic." I think the topic was hot at the moment, and the publisher did not carefully read the whole thing. Also how can you explain that a professor committed so many grammatical errors, and the editor let them errors go? You thought that maybe they had real peer review and real editing before publishing. 'Guess a timely book can be published, even if it's biased and uses the style and grammar typically associated with writings of a struggling middle school student. All in all, this one's a mystery.

Very good reporting, but poor editing.......2003-05-06

In this book, The Votes that Counted, Howard Gillman does a masterful job of reporting the facts that led up to the dispute, and the chronology of events during the aftermath of the Presidential Election in November, 2000.

Naturally, Gillman focuses on Florida, which was the state of most interest in the election, since its electoral votes would ultimately determine who would reside in the White House.

Gillman is, in my opinion, biased, with an evident fondness of the Democratic Party. There is, of course, nothing wrong with being opiniated, and Gillman does not let this interfere with his reporting of the evident facts.

Gillman's analysis of the election and the subsequent judicial participation is a good one, and certainly does correlate well with the title of the book; he explains well why he feels that the justices of the Supreme Court (all five of them that sided with Bush) determined who the next President of the United States would be.

As I was reading this book, I frequently found that I had to stop and re-read some sentences multiple times in order to understand the meaning; verbs were conjugated improperly, and improper tenses were used. I do not fault the author for these grammatical errors - I fault the editor for failing to catch and correct them.

I found this to be a valuable book, and one worthy of studying carefully as study of the Presidental election of 2000 and judicial intervention in that contest. I gave it four stars rather than five because of what I see as a lack of strong editing.

Time to read it again.......2003-03-15

I first ran into this book at my college library and renewed it twice so I could take my time enjoying it. A year later I bought it. I play on reading it again on Spring Break.

Placing the reader inside the legal system so soon after the decision, the author was able to capture the feelings of the justices and judges while the emotions were still in the air.

The only major downfall of this book is the lack of logic expressed by the author several times to support his views. However, in any book in which the author admits a bias, I am inclined to assume there will be a slant to support his view when I read it.

I feel this book is so good, I still give it 5 stars.

Not Biased?.......2002-12-08

The two stars are given for the acute factual account of the events and their proceedings of the election. And while the author does offer arguments to both sides of the debate (whether the final ruling by the supreme court was partisan or not), he often gives illegitimate reasons for dismissing the argument against partisanship while promoting his that is was a partisan decision. Case in point he dedicates 4 pages to the defense of the majority justices rulings (2 of which are dismissals of the argument) while giving some 25 pages to the opposing argument never offering any sound reasoning as to why it itself may be wrong. There are severe holes in many of his reasonings as he often contradicts himself. I was also astounded by the many grammatical errors and misprints, which is naturally to be blamed on the editor. Overall, the book provides a great summation of events, but the only real bias is that of the author's view, regardless of whether he is correct. Clearly this was a one-sided, unfair analysis of the debate with pitiful attempts to appear judicious and fair-sided in its logic.

Average customer rating:

Excellent Read for Lawyers or Laymen
Murder of Mercy
Amazing book
Something to brag about??

Murder of Mercy: Euthanasia on Trial
Stanley M. Rosenblatt
Manufacturer: Prometheus Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Civil Procedure | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

Courts | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Criminal Law | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Medical Ethics | Physician & Patient | Medicine | Subjects | Books

Book Description

Patricia Rosier died at her home in Fort Myers, Florida, in January of 1986, having sought the help of her prominent physician husband, Peter, to end her cancer-ravaged life with some measure of dignity. By November 1987, Peter had been indicted for first degree murder and faced death in Florida's electric chair.

How could it happen? How does a loving husband and father get charged with first degree murder? This compelling true story shows just how easy it is in America's legal system.

"Euthanasia" remains a crime in Florida and in most other states, yet the majority of such "criminals" are never prosecuted. But Dr. Rosier was singled out because he "confessed," both in a television interview and in writing, to believing in euthanasia and to assisting his wife's suicide.

In MURDER OF MERCY every heart-pounding moment of Dr. Rosier's legal ordeal is vividly captured by famed trial attorney Stanley M. Rosenblatt, who, together with his wife and law partner, Susan, represented the accused. Describing an intriguing array of legal twists and turns, this riveting book is more than just gripping courtroom drama. Find out why Patricia's father and brothers sought immunity before they would testify. Feel the rush, the exhilaration, of planning defense strategy: How could anyone explain away Dr. Rosier's confessions? Could the Fort Myers judge be persuaded to change the location of the trial? Should Peter Rosier testify in his own defense? The powerful arguments of the State and the defense are laced with ridicule, sarcasm, and scorn: each side accusing the other of treacherous character assassination.

Rosenblatt's penetrating assessment of judges, the use of expert witnesses, the exclusion of relevant evidence, attorney-client privilege, and the granting of immunity serve as the foundation for a searing critique of America's criminal justice system and the society it is designed to protect.

Customer Reviews:

Excellent Read for Lawyers or Laymen.......2006-04-20

Mr Rosenblatt and his wife obviously gave much thought prior to even being associated with such a case. You will find yourself drawn into the case as much as any fictional mystery. Whether trial lawyer or a simple laymen, anyone can learn from this courtroom drama. If only I could find such a passionate attorney who will look not only at the letter of the law but the spirit of the law as is the case with Rosenblatt.

As for one review who criticizes his standing up to the big liars of the tobacco companies who stated under oath "cigarettes are not addictive", well....what can you say to ignorance. When a company purposely makes their product more addictive than it naturally is for all those who were still in their formative years smoking and allowed to smoke away, they deserve the tenacity and morals of a Stanley Rosenblatt.

Murder of Mercy.......2003-07-14

I found this book to be excellent. I think Mr. Rosenblatt is an unbelievable writer. I love the way everything was so detailed. I think this is an excellent book for anyone who finds euthenasia interesting. This would also be a great book for any lawyer or someone interested in law because you could learn alot from Mr. Rosenblatt from his book.

Amazing book.......2003-07-14

I think this book was outstanding. I loved the way Mr. Rosenblatt described eveything with such detail. I would definately recommend this book to anyone interested in euthenasia.

Something to brag about??.......2000-11-17

Stanley Rosenblatt seems to be proud of his courtroom peformances. His latest, in the Florida smoker's class action trial, resulted in a jury award of almost $145 billion, which will be appealed for years and then eventually thrown out. His closing argument in that case was almost identical to the one in the case he writes about in his book. His general message to juries is along the following lines: Ignore the law. The law used to be that water fountains in this very courthouse could be labeled "for whites only". So, since that was a bad law, you can just ignore all laws, especially the ones that apply to this case. They're too complicated anyway. Instead, just do what feels good. Send a Message. Be on the Today show and have a record breaking verdict to show for the two years you've been sitting here listening to all that boring evidence. Be a powerful person for a day.

Book Description

America's leading constitutional scholars and historians debate the most controversial election in US history. The 2000 presidential election ended, according to constitutional law scholar Ronald Dworkin, in the worst possible way—"not with a national affirmation of democratic principle but by the fiat of the five conservative Supreme Court justices over the fierce objection of the four more liberal justices." The Court's decision ensured both a George W. Bush victory and a continuing cloud of suspicion over that victory—as well as an unprecedented examination of the politics of the Court itself. Now Dworkin, one of the most important liberal analysts in Anglo-American jurisprudence, has assembled a distinguished cast of leading legal scholars and historians to debate the consequences of that fiat in a unique group exchange format, with printed responses by each of the contributors to the essays of the others. This book will undoubtedly be welcomed as the most thorough, intellectually rigorous examination of the 2000 election. A Badly Flawed Election includes contributions by Dworkin, conservative Judge Richard Posner, Harvard Law School's Lani Guinier, the University of Chicago Law School's Cass Sunstein, New York University law professor Richard Pildes, historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Berkeley political scientist Nelson Polsby, and Harvard's Lawrence Tribe, who argued Vice President Al Gore's case before the Supreme Court. Tribe's original essay combines analysis with a personal reflection on the impact the Court's decision has had on his own attitude toward the Court, constitutional law, and teaching. The book also includes a major new introduction by Dworkin, assessing the legal, political, and ethical legacy of the election, and will feature a discussion of policy proposals that would ensure meaningful election reform.

The Supreme Court of Florida and Its Predecessor Courts, 1821-1917

Average customer rating:

The Supreme Court of Florida and Its Predecessor Courts, 1821-1917

Manufacturer: University Press of Florida
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Legal System | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

State & Local Government | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Civil Procedure | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

Courts | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

Jurisprudence | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

Judicial System | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

2004 Presidential Election Electoral College Battleground, Bush versus Kerry ¿ Your Complete Guide to the Contested Election ¿ Laws, Rules, and Court Cases on Recounts, Challenges, Voting Equipment, Ballots, Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the Federal Election Commission, Voting Rights Act, Civil Rights and Disenfranchisement, Provisional Ballots, Voter Fraud and Intimidation, Military and Overseas Ballots, Florida 2000 Recount and Supreme Court Cases (DVD-ROM)

Average customer rating:

2004 Presidential Election Electoral College Battleground, Bush versus Kerry ¿ Your Complete Guide to the Contested Election ¿ Laws, Rules, and Court Cases on Recounts, Challenges, Voting Equipment, Ballots, Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the Federal Election Commission, Voting Rights Act, Civil Rights and Disenfranchisement, Provisional Ballots, Voter Fraud and Intimidation, Military and Overseas Ballots, Florida 2000 Recount and Supreme Court Cases (DVD-ROM)
U.S. Government
Manufacturer: Progressive Management
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: DVD-ROM
ASIN: 1592481884

Book Description

This up-to-date and comprehensive DVD-ROM provides an exhaustive, authoritative, and unique collection of documents about American election procedures, voting, and balloting, including special material about the 2004 Presidential election and the Electoral College, with over 200,000 pages and nearly 4 gigabytes of material. There is a wealth of information pertinent to laws, rules, and court cases on disputed election results, ballot recounts, court challenges, ballots and voting equipment, undervotes, overvotes, civil rights and disenfranchisement, provisional ballots, voter fraud and intimidation, and military and overseas ballots. We have also included the entire contents of our CD-ROM title on the Florida 2000 Bush versus Gore election recount cases with full Supreme Court coverage (which sells separately). Every aspect of the Supreme Court cases is covered - petitions, oral argument transcripts, briefs, and opinions.

There is detailed coverage of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), the Voting Rights Act and the enforcement activities of the Department of Justice, the work of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP), and the Office of Special Counsel related to the Hatch Act. Coverage of the Federal Election Commission is notably thorough, with complete information on campaign finance reports, reporting forms and filing information, historical demographic statistics and reports, constitutional and statutory provisions, regulations and reports on the Bipartisan Campaign Reform of Act of 2002 (BCRA, McCain-Feingold), political parties, voter registration (including the Voter Registration Act - Motor Voter) and much more. This DVD-ROM uses next-generation search technology that allows complete indexing and makes all PDF files on the disc fully searchable. The massive scope of this material is truly awesome!

In addition, there are historical voting tables from Congressional elections, and election statistics gathered by the House from 1920 to 2002; House lobbying disclosure forms, and Senate election material.

In all, the disc has an incredible total of over 200,000 pages reproduced using Adobe Acrobat PDF software - allowing direct viewing on Windows and Apple Macintosh systems. Reader software is included on the disc. Advanced search and indexing features are built into our reproduction, providing a complete full-text index. This enables the user to search all the PDF files on the disc at one time for words or phrases using just one search command! The Acrobat cataloging technology adds enormous value and uncommon functionality to this impressive collection of government documents and material. There is no other reference format that is as fast, convenient, comprehensive, and portable!

Our discs are privately-compiled collections of official public domain U.S. government files and documents - they are not produced by the federal government. They are designed to provide a convenient user-friendly reference work, utilizing the benefits of the Acrobat format to uniformly present thousands of pages that can be rapidly reviewed, searched, or printed without untold hours of tedious searching and downloading. Vast archives of important public domain government information that might otherwise remain inaccessible are available for instant review no matter where you are.

This DVD-ROM is for use in a computer DVD drive. The files can be accessed from the File Explorer in the same way that you open files from a CD-ROM disc; the CD-ROM and DVD-ROM formats are functionally the same, but the DVD has more than six times greater storage capacity. Of course, these discs CANNOT be "played" in a DVD player connected to a television set. They contain computer-formatted data, not video.

Average customer rating:

Disappointingly uneven, but worth it

The Vote: Bush, Gore, and the Supreme Court

Manufacturer: University Of Chicago Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Elections | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
General | Political Science | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Elections | Political Science | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Bush V. Gore: The Court Cases and the Commentary

Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts

Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000

Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election

The Votes That Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election

ASIN: 0226213072

Book Description

Though George W. Bush took office in January, the nation is still recovering from the prolonged and complex process by which he was elected. The Florida electoral controversy and the subsequent decisions by both the Florida courts and the U.S. Supreme Court left citizens and scholars alike divided over the role of the judiciary in the electoral arena. Now, after a few months of reflection, leading constitutional scholarsCass R. Sunstein, Richard A. Epstein, Pamela S. Karlan, Richard A. Posner, and John Yoo, among others—weigh in on the Supreme Court's actions, which remain sensible, legally legitimate, and pragmatically defensible to some and an egregious abuse of power to others. Representing the full spectrum of views and arguments, The Vote offers the most timely and considered guide to the ultimate consequences and significance of the Supreme Court's decision.

The contributors to this volume were highly visible in the national media while the controversy raged, and here they present fully fleshed-out arguments for the positions they promoted on the airwaves. Readers will find in The Vote equally impassioned defenses for and indictments of the Court's actions, and they will come to understand the practical and theoretical implications of the Court's ruling in the realms of both law and politics. No doubt a spate of books will appear on the 2000 presidential election, but none will claim as distinguished a roster of contributors better qualified to place these recent events in their appropriate historical, legal, and political contexts.

Leading constitutional scholars render their verdicts on the 2000 presidential election controversy

Contributors:

Richard A. Epstein

Elizabeth Garrett

Samuel Issacharoff

Pamela S. Karlan

Michael W. McConnell

Frank I. Michelman

Richard H. Pildes

Richard A. Posner

David A. Strauss

Cass R. Sunstein

John Yoo

An earlier electronic edition of The Vote was available on the University of Chicago Press Web site.

Customer Reviews:

Disappointingly uneven, but worth it .......2007-08-30

In late November and early December of 2000, the American public got what started out as a promising lesson in civics and constitutional law. That is, until the outrageous decision in Bush v. Gore, which only a few serious scholars support. A couple of them contribute to this book and they are as unconvincing as ever. But then some, inluding the ubiquitous Richard Posner, are on record supporting other notoriously wrong decisions.

But you don't have to read the contributions of Epstein, Posner, or Yoo. The book is worth it for the Richard Pildes piece, "Democracy and Disorder"", a discussion of several Supreme Court decisions where the Court has made what I believe to be egregious and erroneous rulings that protect the existing two-party system from innovations that would arguably strengthen our democracy. Consistent dissenters from that line of cases are the two justices perhaps most likely to retire soon, Stevens and Ginzburg, who were the most vigorous of the dissenters in Bush v. Gore.

Why are these decisions erroneous and egregious? Well, for one thing, the Constitution does not even mention political parties. Pildes's point is that the Court seems afraid of democracy and any tendency toward disorder that may spring from such innovations as blanket primaries--primary elections systems that would allow voters to vote for candidates in either party. What he fails to develop is the point that these so-called "conservative" justices are mostly the very bloc that claims not to be making law, just interpreting the Constitution according to the intent of the framers.

Alas, another problem with Pildes's otherwise excellent essay/article is that it is plagued by academic jargon, including for example the use of the term "context" repeatedly where the word should be "circumstances", or "situation". This is tiresome and rises to the level of mannerism as the term is stretched to serve almost as a syntactical transition here and there and gratutiously employed to serve almost every purpose. For example, one of the footnotes suggest that the reader refer to another book "for greater context" on the legal questions.

Editor Sunstein also has his favorite vogue words, one of which seems to be "cabin" used as a verb to mean "confine" or "restrict". This too becomes tiresome.

The University of Chicago Law School is a very presitigious institution and the University itself is affiliated with a manual of style used by professional writers. So these stylistic errors, which are annoying in several of these articles, are unfortunate.

I concur with other reviewers that this book is for law students and lawyers, not the general public. That too is perhaps unfortunate in that the arguments and points could have been simplified and explained more clearly for a lay readership, leaving the abstruse legal matters to the footnotes. And speaking of the footnotes, and to end on a positive note, at least they are at the bottom of the page, not at the end of the book, though perhaps if the book had been aimed at a less specialized or lay reader, the notes would be less distracting at the end.

FLORIDA RULES OF COURT STATE 2004 (Florida Rules Of Court 2004)

Average customer rating:

FLORIDA RULES OF COURT STATE 2004 (Florida Rules Of Court 2004)

Manufacturer: Thompson West
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: 0314110143

Product Description

Florida Rules of Court State 2004

Average customer rating:

Florida Rules of Court (Local 2006)

Manufacturer: West Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: 0314959955

Product Description

This local rules volume contains local court rules and selected administrative orders for the Second, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Eleventh, Thirteenth, Fifteenth, Seventeenth, and Twentieth Circuits.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books