Book Description
A leading Supreme Court expert recounts the personal and philosophical rivalries that forged our nation’s highest court and continue to shape our daily lives
The Supreme Court is the most mysterious branch of government, and yet the Court is at root a human institution, made up of very bright people with very strong egos, for whom political and judicial conflicts often become personal.
In this compelling work of character-driven history, Jeffrey Rosen recounts the history of the Court through the personal and philosophical rivalries on the bench that transformed the law—and by extension, our lives. The story begins with the great Chief Justice John Marshall and President Thomas Jefferson, cousins from the Virginia elite whose differing visions of America set the tone for the Court’s first hundred years. The tale continues after the Civil War with Justices John Marshall Harlan and Oliver Wendell Holmes, who clashed over the limits of majority rule. Rosen then examines the Warren Court era through the lens of the liberal icons Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, for whom personality loomed larger than ideology. He concludes with a pairing from our own era, the conservatives William H. Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia, only one of whom was able to build majorities in support of his views.
Through these four rivalries, Rosen brings to life the perennial conflict that has animated the Court—between those justices guided by strong ideology and those who forge coalitions and adjust to new realities. He illuminates the relationship between judicial temperament and judicial success or failure. The stakes are nothing less than the future of American jurisprudence.
Customer Reviews:
A Concise History of Politics vs Law.......2007-10-06
Recently there have been many good books available about the Supreme Court. For a quick, no-nonsense straight to the heart of the matter history of Supreme Court, this is the book. A history of the Supreme Court derived from its major decisions and its major dissenters. The author shows that often justices that may be on the dissenting side of Supreme Court decisions are sometimes justices that are ahead of their time. Their lonely decisions often become basics to the American way of life in a later era. The Author, Jeff Rosen also relays a life's lesson to Supreme Court Justices, that in the interplay between majority vs. dissenters decisions, no matter how dedicated, wise, or oracle-like a justice appears, history bears out that the justices that "play ball", fraternizes, cajoles, and displays a good nature seem to win out. In other words the Law is not just the Law, the decisions cannot be divorced from the political impetus that brought them to the court and the most successful Justices are the most political Justices. Nothing underscores this more than the chapter on Justice Holmes and Justice Harlan. Justice Holmes was an ivory tower type justice and his reputation is somewhat revered today. Justice Harlan is lesser known, but the track record shows that modern American life revolves around decisions he made and that Holmes has been surpassed in almost all his major decisions.
A very rewarding book, that will make the reader feel that in one book you can gain an understanding of what make the supreme court tick, and some of the twists ands turns it has taken in its history
How the Court Works.......2007-06-18
Jeffrey Rosen's accessible and engaging companion book to the PBS series offers not only a fine introduction to the U.S. Supreme Court (and many of the most important cases it's decided in its history) but also a perspective from which to understand the Court as an institution. This perspective is tantamount to Rosen's thesis: that "judicial temperament" is a quality possessed by the Court's most distinguished justices, those who subordinate their ideological leanings to the deliberative and practical process of establishing legal consensus.
Rosen illustrates his thesis with four case studies: Marshall and Jefferson (not a justice); Harlan and Holmes; Black and Douglas; Rehnquist and Scalia. In each case one justice is seen as embracing judicial temperament while the other (or Jefferson, in the first chapter) is cast as something of an ideological maverick, a flamboyant but ultimately less influential constitutional thinker. Like one reviewer here, I found the questions raised by such pairings to be productive rather than reductive: Rosen is making a legal-historical argument here, and so reading his history of the Supreme Court is necessarily an exercise in critical interpretation.
The chapters on the twentieth-century Court are excellent, with Rosen showing how the liberal-leaning Hugo Black and the conservative-leaning William Rehnquist had more in common with each other (in terms of judicial temperament) than with their respective colleagues: William O. Douglas and Antonin Scalia. Here Rosen parses the legacies of Black and Rehnquist by showing how their restrained judicial character helped them produce well-crafted decisions that advanced the Court's legitimacy in the public eye.
Douglas and Scalia, on the other hand, were/are so committed to the purity of their ideological beliefs that, whatever one thinks of their individual decisions (and I am decidedly aligned with Douglas over Scalia in this regard), one has to come to terms with the fact that their jurisprudence will not have a lasting influence on the law of the land. Douglas and Scalia are seen as larger-than-life personalities, self-aggrandizing justices who rarely spoke for the Court as such.
Again, you might agree or disagree with the specifics of Rosen's argument and framing of his historical examples. But the survey presented here is a solid, general introduction to Supreme Court history. And with judicial temperament Rosen gives us a lens through which we might view that history, and understand better exactly how the Court works.
Good History - Not Enough Catch.......2007-05-24
For a look into some of the most well known figures in the Supreme Court, this book does a fantastic job. From in-depth analysis of their personalities to little anecdotes on each Justice, the Author clearly knows his history.
It's a tad short, and I think the specific cases could have been covered in greater detail. While it was informative, it didn't have that something special that had me anxious to keep reading. At times, I felt like I was reading a history book.
If you're someone looking to get some background into the Supreme Court and some of the characters that shaped it, this is a good book to start with. You may not feel completely entertained, but you will feel smarter after reading this book.
The real Justice League of America.......2007-05-14
It's one of the fundamental principles of the U.S. Constitution that the three branches of government are more-or-less equal, with checks and balances assuring that no branch takes over. The reality, of course, is different: at times - particularly in the 1800s - the Congress was the more powerful branch, while at other times -especially recently - the Presidency has taken the reins. The judicial branch, however, has always been in third place; although it makes a difference at times, it rarely is more visible than its "coequals". Nonetheless, there are times that the judicial branch - and in particular, the Supreme Court - has assumed a critical role in history.
Jeffrey Rosen's The Supreme Court is not so much a history of the institution as a study as to how certain personalities affected the Court. He focuses on four such rivalries that dictated not only the direction of the Court but also the direction of the country. The first rivalry (and the only one featuring a non-Court figure) is Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall. These two embodies the two principal political philosophies of the early United States: Republicanism and Federalism. Unlike previous Chief Justices, Marshall really defined the Court and made it an important part of the government, most notably with the Marbury v. Madison decision. Since Marshall differed with Jefferson on many issues, this set the two branches at odds with one another.
The next rivalry is John Marshall Harlan and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., a pairing that is probably the most obscure to the modern reader. Holmes, with his nickname "The Great Dissenter" earned a reputation based on his dissents in some free speech cases, but often had much less sympathetic rulings, such as his opposition to civil rights and his support of eugenics. Harlan, on the other hand, was more forward-thinking, and notably dissented on Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court decision that - after Dred Scott - is probably the darkest mark on the institution's history.
The third section deals with Hugo Black and William Douglas. Unlike the previous pairings, these two were politically of a similar bent, but they still had different judicial philosophies, with Black being the sounder reasoner and Douglas being somewhat more free-wheeling. Douglas's presidential ambitions, which never really amounted to much, also affected his decision-making. Similarly, the fourth section deals with two Justices with similar politics yet different philosophies: William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia. While Rehnquist would often try for consensus, Scalia is more absolute in his beliefs and doesn't really seem to care who he rankles.
In each pairing, Rosen casts one person as hero (Marshall, Harlan, Black and Rehnquist) and one as villain (Jefferson, Holmes, Douglas and Scalia). Of course, things are not really that simple and Rosen recognizes flaws in the heroes and virtues in the villains; perhaps it is better not to use the heroes-and-villains analogy at all, but it is clear Rosen favors one in each rivalry. This has less to do with politics than with technique: Rosen favors Justices who can promote harmony within the Court and can create rulings with real potency to them. Rulings that go 5-4 are not nearly as strong as those decided unanimously, and are more likely to be eventually reversed.
In the final section, Rosen offers an early analysis of new Chief Justice John Roberts, one that is generally positive. Roberts, Rosen believes, seems to have learned from the better Chief Justices (a group in which Rosen would include Marshall, Warren and Rehnquist) as to how to run the Supreme Court. Rosen's writing is insightful, clear and reasonably objective (in the sense that he doesn't seem to favor either the political right or left). This book is a good, alternative way at looking at the history and structure of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court.......2007-05-07
An excellent book. If I were still teaching Constitutional Law at the college level, I would use some or all of it in class to show that law is interpreted by "real people." I think anybody would find it interesting, but lawyers and law students should find it fascinating.
Average customer rating:
- Calculations are only as good as your numbers
- Pants on fire?
- Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed.
- Very Interesting
- History as Science Fiction
|
History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
Anatoly Fomenko
Manufacturer: Mithec
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Chinese
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Irish
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Japanese
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Women
| Specific Groups
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Augustine, Saint
| ( A )
| People, A-Z
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Doctors & Medicine
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Lawyers & Criminals
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Love, Sex & Marriage
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Assyria, Babylonia & Sumer
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Early Civilization
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Historiography
| Historical Study
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Asian American
| United States
| World Literature
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Asian American
| Poetry
| United States
| World Literature
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
French
| Erotica
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Victorian
| Erotica
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Epic
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
German
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Russian
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Spanish
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Chinese
| Classics
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Conspiracy Theories
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
War on Drugs
| Crime & Criminals
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
English (All)
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Arabic
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Armenian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Czech
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Greek
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Hungarian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Japanese
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Korean
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Norwegian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Persian & Farsi
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Polish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Portuguese
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Romanian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Russian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Swedish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Turkish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Science
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Online Research
| Genealogy
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Native American
| Earth-Based Religions
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
History of Science
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Magic & Wizards
| Fantasy
| Science Fiction & Fantasy
| Subjects
| Books
Sailor Moon
| Popular Characters
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Pilates
| Exercise & Fitness
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
History
| Fashion
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Art Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Biographies
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Children's Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Entertainment Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Health Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Fiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Reference Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Romance Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Science Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Science Fiction & Fantasy Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2 (Chronology)
-
History: Fiction or Science? Astronomical methods as applied to chronology. Ptolemy's Almagest. Chronology III
-
Discovering the Mysteries of Ancient America: Lost History And Legends, Unearthed And Explored
-
Before the Pharaohs: Egypt's Mysterious Prehistory
-
They Cast No Shadows: A Collection of Essays on the Illuminati, Revisionist History, and Suppressed Technologies
ASIN: 2913621058 |
Book Description
Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.
Customer Reviews:
Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03
Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.
Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19
Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.
Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09
There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.
For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.
Very Interesting.......2007-03-07
It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.
History as Science Fiction.......2007-01-10
Anatoly Fomenko has written a very intriguing book, full of pictures, charts, and computer 'proof' of his thesis: backwards of AD900 we don't really know what happened or when. Between AD900 and AD1600 there is more certainty, but there is still a lot of fuzzy ground, and things don't get reliable until we get past the 1600's where the printing press made it very difficult for the perpetrators of this timeline manipulation to change anything that had been committed to print. The Dark Ages did not happen. Books were burned for a reason. One organization has doubled the actual length of its existence by expanding the real chronology. Read why.
I had always wondered why Christ died about AD33 and yet men waited until the 11th century to form the Knights Templar, the Cathars, etc and go after the Holy Land by force. Why the 1000 year gap? Turns out there wasn't more than a 10-12 year gap and he proves it using astronomy. This also implies that the planet is not as old as we have been told, and current Christian and other creationist scientists are already championing that idea without being aware of Fomenko's book. The two groups, creationist scientists and the Russian mathematical analysts corroborate each other. Fascinating.
Of course, all this flies in the face of what we have been told traditionally is the 'proper' chronology of western civilization, and most readers will experience 'cognitive dissonance' in reading this book. It means that our history going backwards from AD1600 becomes progressively more incorrect and unreliable until it cannot be trusted at all... in the space of 700-800 years.
Naturally, the curious, open-minded reader will want to know WHO did this, WHY, and did any of the events we think of as really ancient ever happen?
Dr. Fomenko is a respected scientist/mathematician at Moscow State University who has already answered these questions to the satisfaction of his initially skeptical colleagues. Most of them are now believers, a few still refuse to believe (the usual diehards), and of course the western press has ignored Fomenko's work -- for obvious reasons when you read the book. The ones who perpetrated this chronology ruse have a lot to answer for. They are still with us. That's why this book is a well-kept secret.
I gave the book a 4-star rating because I was unable to check out some of his claims; those I checked were as he said. But if even 1/3 of his claims are true, this punches a big hole in what we think is our history, the meaning of western civilization, our educational process (for repeating the ruse as gospel), and the trustworthiness of the organization that perpetrated this ruse, well-intentioned or not.
This book relates to current research into a Young Earth paradigm, to John Keel's discoveries about our planet, and Fr Malachi Martin's insights (in his now out-of-print books). We are indeed sheep who are manipulated and kept ignorant -- for a reason. While knowing what these men have to say may be the "booby prize" (as in: 'what can you do with this knowledge?'), it will provide interesting reading. Didn't someone say: "...and the Truth will set you free."?? For you to judge if this book contains the truth.
Book Description
Can the government seize your house in order to build a shopping mall? Can it determine what you can do to your own body? Why are you allowed to copy songs on a CD, but not music files from the Internet? The answers to those questions come from the Supreme Court—and its rulings have shaped American life and justice. Here are 34 of the most significant issues it has grappled with—from equal rights to privacy rights, from the limits of speech to the boundaries between church and state. Many of these cases read like thrillers…right down to their cliff-hanging endings. Among the most intriguing: the Dred Scott decision, Miranda v. Arizona, Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, and Bush v. Gore.
Customer Reviews:
A good overview.......2007-08-06
I enjoyed this book a lot. It is by no means a definitive legal dissertation on the landmark cases of the Supreme Court. Nor it is especially informative about the law.
What this book does is give a general audience something to think about. Thirty-four somethings to be exact.
The author goes over the cases with broad brushstrokes. The prose is easy to understand and consciously avoids the legalese that would turn off most readers. Instead, the purpose is to get the reader thinking about the ramifications of each case and how it affects our lives (for better or for worse) today.
Good book, easily accessible, but..........2007-06-05
I bought this book and in general I really like it. Very light on jargon and written in relatively simple prose, it was very easy to understand. The selection of cases seemed very thoughtful and historical context of the cases was very interesting. But I just can't give it five stars.
The simple writing makes the book easy-to-read but I felt like I was reading something written for a high-school-level audience and while the level of detail was adequate, it is just barely so--I finished the entire book on a two-hour plane flight and had nothing to read by the time I got to the hotel.
Just what I ordered.......2007-05-12
This was just what I ordered. Shipping was a bit slow (DHL couldn't find us, not your fault) Worth the wait! Will order again...
A fantastic overview of landmark cases.......2007-03-21
Written for the lay reader, _The Supremes' Greatest Hits_ clearly outlines the issues, decisions and relevance of Supreme Court decisions that have an immeadiate impact on daily life. The cases you'd expect to find are here (Marbury v. Madison, Roe v. Wade, Miranda v. Arizona, Brown v. Board) but there are also several cases that I'd never heard of but are no less important (Griswold v. Connecticut, Texas v. Johnson). The facts of each case are broadly discussed, how they relate to the Constitutiuon is outlined, and a brief (1 - 2 page) explaination of why the Court made its decision is explained. A great introduction to landmark cases.
Quick and easy to read.......2007-02-24
Easy to read. No lawyer-ease to try to decifer. Good point of view that looks at how these cases have broader impact then just the case itself. If it doesn't wake you up to be more involved in your family, community, country...maybe you took too many sleeping pills.
Average customer rating:
- Educational
- A case Excellently Presented
- Right Result, Wrong Reasoning
- Doesn't mince any words
- Supreme Court Betrayal
|
The Betrayal of America: How the Supreme Court Undermined the Constitution and Chose Our President
Vincent Bugliosi , and
Gerry Spence
Manufacturer: Nation Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Legal System
| Government
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Government
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Law
| Subjects
| Books
| Administrative Law
| Biographies
| Business
| Constitutional Law
| Criminal Law
| Current Affairs
| Dictionaries & Terminology
| English Law
| Environmental & Natural Resources Law
| Ethics & Professional Responsibility
| Family & Health Law
| General
| Intellectual Property
| International Law
| Law Practice
| Legal Education
| Legal History
| Media & the Law
| One-L
| Perspectives on Law
| Philosophy
| Practical Guides
| Private Law
| Procedures & Litigation
| Series
| Specialties
| Statute Summaries
| Statutes & Cases
| Taxation
Current Events
| Nonfiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
| Civil Rights & Liberties
| Conspiracy Theories
| Poverty
| September 11
| Terrorism
| War & Peace
Government
| Nonfiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
| Congresses, Senates, & Legislative Bodies
| Constitutions
| Democracy
| Elections
| Federal Government
| State & Local Government
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
| General
| Leaders & Leadership
| Levels of Government
| Political Doctrines
| Political Theory
| Rights
| United States
All 4-for-3 Deals
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000
-
Till Death Us Do Part: A True Murder Mystery
-
And the Sea Will Tell
-
Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election
-
Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder
ASIN: 156025355X |
Book Description
During the course of American history, wrongful events have occurred and certain Americans have stood up and spoken out against these wrongs: Tom Paine, Edward R. Murrow, Daniel Ellsberg. Vincent Bugliosi takes his place in this special pantheon of patriots with his powerful, brilliant, and courageous expose of crime by the highest court in the land. When an article he wrote on this topic appeared in The Nation magazine in February 2001, it drew the largest outpouring of letters and e-mail in the magazine's 136-year history, tapping a deep reservoir of outrage. The original article is now expanded, amended, and backed by amplifications, endnotes, and the relevant Supreme Court documents.
Customer Reviews:
Educational.......2007-08-30
This book packs a lot of information into very few pages. Bugliosi does a good job of supporting his suppositions with law. There are so many points made, most everyone will be unaware of some of them. The biggest drawback for me was that sometimes Bugliosi strays into name-calling which leads one to begin to doubt if some of the scholarship isn't slanted more than is obvious at first blush.
A case Excellently Presented.......2007-08-05
Bugliosi is one of a kind! He makes his points clearly and effectively. I wish he could take all these so called "justices" to court where he would run circles around them with his startlingly clear reasoning and thinking, ending with them all being dragged off to the nearest prison for treason. A great book to get the juices of freedom flowing again from a great man who truly cares about justice.
Right Result, Wrong Reasoning.......2007-06-01
I voted for Al Gore in 2000 and wish that he were finishing his second term as President at this time. However, if you put partisan emotions aside and look at the full legal context of that election, it is clear that Bush was the legally elected President.
Article II of the Constitution gives state legislatures the authority to appoint electors to the electoral college, using whatever criteria each legislature establishes. In the early days of the Republic, most legislatures chose all electors themselves, by majority vote. Over time, other criteria were used, until now all 50 states award electors based on the results of the popular vote. With only one or two exceptions (I forget which states), the candidate with the highest popular vote in a given state gets ALL of that state's electoral votes.
For many decades, Florida has followed this procedure to award its electoral votes. But Florida election laws clearly state that the state legislature has the right to set aside the results of the popular vote totals; the legislature may then directly award, by majority vote of all legislators, the electoral votes to whichever candidate it chooses. In 2000, both Houses of the Florida legislature had solid Republican majorities. The Republican leaders of both bodies (and the Republican governor, Jeb Bush), clearly stated that, if necessary, they would call a special legislative session to award ALL Florida electors to George W. Bush.
Had that scenario occurred, here is what would likely have played out. On the day that Congress was scheduled to count the electoral votes, the Gore operatives would have challenged the Florida electoral count. Existing FEDERAL election laws would then have become operative. The Republican U.S. House majority would have awarded the electoral votes to Bush. The U.S. Senate would have voted 51-50 to award the electoral votes to Gore, with then Vice President Gore casting the tiebreaking vote in his favor. Federal law states that if the Senate and House award electors to different candidates, the governor of the state in question has the right to break the tie and award the electors to the candidate he so chooses. The Florida governor in 2000...Jeb Bush, George W.'s brother. In a last ditch effort to salvage the election for Gore, the Florida Supreme Court would probably have tried to use their powers of judicial review to thwart this scenario, by claiming that a state Supreme Court has authority to review all acts of its own legislature. However, the U.S. Supreme Court would certainly have ruled that the U.S. Constitution unequivocally gives the power to select electors (by whichever method it chooses) to state legislatures, outside the scope of state court judicial review - and by more than a 5-4 vote.
So there you have it, folks. Lament all you want over what federal election laws should be, bash the electoral college, lambaste the confusing "butterfly" ballots in south Florida, criticize the flimsy equal protection arguments of the 5 or 7 justices, etc. But all partisan feelings aside, George W. Bush was the legitimately, constitutionally elected winner of the 2000 Presidential election. All other legal reasonings in this book make for nice academic discussions, but are beside the point in any practical sense.
Doesn't mince any words.......2007-05-30
Bugliosi turns a prosecutor's eye to Bush v. Gore and finds the decision not just lacking substance, but a criminal act.
First he deals with motive. All of the 5 justices who chose Bush as president came up through partisan Republican politics. While that's expected (since they come to their positions through the political process), integrity in upholding their oath to support the Consitition has been expected to take precedence. Beyond their partisan pasts and connections, 3 of the 5 had immediate and direct interest in a Bush presidency. Justice O'Connor publically said that if Gore won she'd have to postpone her retirement at least 4 years (so as not to have a Democratic President apppoint her successor.) Justice Thomas's wife, through her Heritage Foundation position was poised to serve on the Bush transition team and Justice Scalia's two sons work for a law firm that handles Bush's legal business.
Bugliosi doesn't say what would happen if we, the non-elite, helped out friends or worked things to our interest through service on a jury, but I'm sure something would.
Next Bugliosi deals with the legal issues. How could the court accept Bush's argument that Bush needed "equal protection" from Gore? That is... the court assumed that Bush won the election and that by counting the votes Gore could take it away from him. Votes, 60,000 in this case, the sacred element of our democracy... the very core of what people fight and die for... were negated as the Court ignored its own entrenched states right biases and regarded time frames as inflexible when complete past practice and case law showed recounts and seating delegates, (with disputes always decided by states and state courts), to be viewed as target dates and not rigid dealines.
On p. 155 Bugliosi has a hypothetical script. He suggests the dialog of the justices and how they came to "reason out" their unsigned opinion that allowed them to pick the president over 50 million voting Americans.
In the early part of the book (written in 2001) he likens this decision to the "preposterous" idea that Republican prosecutors would prosecute only Democrats and vice versa. It was strange that he would mention it, because it was this exact thing that piqued my current interest in this 2001 book.
Supreme Court Betrayal.......2007-05-12
Mr. Bugliosi's excellent book brings into question the entire operation and philosophy of the supreme court. Perhaps the supreme court should be simply the highest appellate court and leave questions of constitutionality to the judicial committees of Congress. As Mr. Bugliosi points out, there is nothing in the Consitution that gives the Supreme Court the right to strike down federal and state laws as unconstitutional.
Book Description
Authored by two leading scholars of the Supreme Court and its policy making, this study systematically presents and validates the use of the attitudinal model to explain and predict Supreme Court decision making. In the process, it critiques the two major alternative models of Supreme Court decision making and their major variants--the legal and rational choice. Using the U.S. Supreme Court Data Base, the justices' private papers, and other sources of information, the book analyzes the appointment process, certiorari, the decision on the merits, opinion assignments, and the formation of opinion coalitions.
Book Description
Should the Supreme Court have the last word when it comes to interpreting the Constitution? The justices on the Supreme Court certainly seem to think so--and their critics say that this position threatens democracy. But Keith Whittington argues that the Court's justices have not simply seized power and circumvented politics. The justices have had power thrust upon them--by politicians, for the benefit of politicians. In this sweeping political history of judicial supremacy in America, Whittington shows that presidents and political leaders of all stripes have worked to put the Court on a pedestal and have encouraged its justices to accept the role of ultimate interpreters of the Constitution.
Whittington examines why presidents have often found judicial supremacy to be in their best interest, why they have rarely assumed responsibility for interpreting the Constitution, and why constitutional leadership has often been passed to the courts. The unprecedented assertiveness of the Rehnquist Court in striking down acts of Congress is only the most recent example of a development that began with the founding generation itself. Presidential bids for constitutional leadership have been rare, but reflect the temporary political advantage in doing so. Far more often, presidents have cooperated in increasing the Court's power and encouraging its activism. Challenging the conventional wisdom that judges have usurped democracy, Whittington shows that judicial supremacy is the product of democratic politics.
Customer Reviews:
(RAW Rating: 4.5) - What is happening to black men?.......2007-08-04
Demico Boothe has explored the reasons so many black men are indeed in prison in, WHY ARE SO MANY BLACK MEN IN PRISON? He begins with his own story of a shaky upbringing and his subsequent dabbling in drug dealing. He was caught with a few grams of crack cocaine but because it was the dreaded crack, he was given 10 years in prison. When he left prison after serving his time, he was actually railroaded back into prison by a crooked justice system. He delves deeply into our justice system and the motives behind all the new prisons that are being built. He gives succinct and reasonable views of exactly what is happening now in the United States and how the past has played a role in the present. He uses persuasive statistics regarding the number of black men in prison as compared to the number of white men who are incarcerated.
Demico Boothe has done an excellent job of researching his subject and it is a plus, if unfortunate for him, that he has actually experienced first hand what he's talking about. I knew I was hearing the real story rather than just statistics from an intellectual who had no real idea of what the prison system is really like. I would have liked for Boothe to search a little deeper into the Haiti, Aristide and USA question, maybe even reading Randall Robinson's take on the situation, and then he might see it a bit differently. Otherwise, it is a good book and one every one in America should read. We indeed, have a crisis going on.
Reviewed by Alice Holman
of The RAWSISTAZ Reviewers
Why Are So Many Black Men In Prison? A Comprehensive Account Of How And Why The Prison Industry Has Become A Predatory Entity In.......2007-06-09
The book was very interesting. I learned soooo much about the government and the prison industry. I did some searching independantly to check on the things reported in the book and they are very true. Great Read!! Buy the book.
A Must Read.......2007-05-25
Mr. Demico's book is a must-read for anyone concerned about young African American men. Although I did not agree with every conclusion he reached, Demico's main premises are convincing. As a white woman who teaches mainly students of color, I am always impressed, and often in awe, of those young men who reach college with so much going against them. Demico's books lays bare not only the horrible inequalities of our society, but also the racist attitudes of our political system - - Democrats, Republicans, and most everyone in between.
Why are so many Black Men in Prison?.......2007-05-13
I is a well put together book. He really goes into a lot of detail of how our society is really set up.
Why are so many blacks in prison?.......2007-05-12
I found this book very interesting. As a white devil myself, I had no idea that I was responsible for forcing blacks into committing crimes and then subsequently clogging up the whole "Prison Industrial Complex"(tm). I will try to stop causing this, as I am sure it is creating a LOT of trouble for everyone! Sorry!
It is probably also my fault that young black men dressed in XXXXL clothes overtly threaten me and my family members routinely. Can anyone tell me what I should do to make this not happen?
I imagine it's also my fault that black on white violent crime is WAY higher than white on black violent crime, even though blacks constitute about 12.5% of the population, and whites are about 70%. But since it is impossible for a black to commit a hate crime according to our criminal justice system (since blacks are not under any circumstances racist), statistically, there are more white on black hate crimes. Boothe notes a statistic regarding hate crimes, but he skips the one about interracial violence in general.
In sum, Boothe notes that just about everything blacks do is actually MY fault, because my skin is white. Boothe, I've got a word for you.
Introspection.
Amazon.com
The savvy, chatty author of The Courage of Their Convictions brings us a scholarly reckoning of the 200-plus years of decisions made by the highest court in the land. Not surprisingly (and justifiably, given his erudite arguments), Peter H. Irons represents the court's work as a never-ending appeal of the powerless to the powerful: of the just over 100 supreme justices who have sat on the court, all but two have been white, all but two have been men, and all but seven have been Christian, whereas the supplicants to our nation's highest bar are typically racial minorities, women, and deviants in some way from the religious and social mainstream.
Taking a representative (if not comprehensive) accounting of the Supreme Court's most significant decisions, Irons puts cultural and political context--and a human face--to the parties involved, painting an absorbing and involving picture of landmark cases that readers are likely to recall but not fully understand. Whether he's explicating the tortuous history of freedom-seeking slave Dred Scott or explaining the "a Jap's a Jap" reasoning behind the legal exculpation of World War II internment camps, Irons reminds us of the court's spotted history while still conveying the deep affection he has for it. (Includes a thoughtful appendix with the complete text of the Constitution and suggestions for further reading.) --Paul Hughes
Book Description
A major work of history, by a renowned legal scholar, chronicles an institution that affects the life of every American.
In the tradition of Howard Zinn's The People's History of the United States, Peter Irons brings to the history of our Supreme Court the "human touch" (San Diego Union) of the first-person stories of his own classic book The Courage of Their Convictions. This sweeping account of the Supreme Court traces its path from the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to its controversial rulings on free speech, racial segregation, abortion, and gay rights.
"When Peter Irons looks at an institution," says Kenneth Karst of UCLA Law School, "he sees the people who are its lifeblood." A People's History of the Supreme Court views that vital institution from both sides of the mahogany bench.
Irons provides sketches of every justice from John Jay to Stephen Breyer and portraits of such legal giants as John Marshall, Roger Taney, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Hugo Black, Earl Warren, and Thurgood Marshall. But the people who stand in the foreground of this vivid historical mural are ordinary Americans like Dred Scott, Homer Plessy, and Michael Hardwick. The cases they brought to the Supreme Court forced the justices to confront the Constitution's promise that every American deserves "the blessings of liberty." And in this fascinating work, Irons recounts the landmark decisions in which the Court both honored and broke that promise, in cases that span more than two centuries.
Customer Reviews:
A Difficult Read.......2007-04-17
I think that most of the reviewers of this book must be lawyers who are accustomed to over developed and complicated sentence structure. This is a writing technique well practiced by the legal profession and insurance policy writers.
Slogging through this book is just plain tortuous. It is very detailed and is probably a good book for pre-law or first year law students. Anyone else will find it to be painful.
The author is definitely a lefty but presents his viewpoints honestly and very well. The subject matter is fascinating but the execution is excruciating.
Interesting read.......2007-03-12
Although it drags a little at the beginning, once you get to the
history and the cases, it gets interesting. It's writtin in plain
english, except for the legal terms which are usually explained.
Someone not interested in the Supreme court probably would find
it rather boring, but then why would they be reading it? Author
writes with a pro-civil rights anti-business sentiment which
is most often justified (considering past civil rights abuses),
but it is not too overly done.
Just be ready for this slant on the cases (an opposing opinion
is not presented). All in all I enjoyed the book and think it is
well written.
Kudos.......2006-11-10
As a retired Judicial Officer I was very pleased with the presentation by Professor Irons. The book is written in a manner that regardless of your understanding of the law and Supreme Court decisions it will hold your interest. Since that reading I have bought his other books and even a course of his on DVD through The Teaching Company.
We are not only presented with crucial decisions but the reasons, good or bad, for that conclusion. This occurs with the additional reward of what social and poltical forces help shape these decisions.
The book is easily readible and extremely informative. I suggest this for those interested in quality writing, history, sociology and the law..
I wish this was required reading for all high school students.......
If you like others to think for you, this is your book!.......2006-11-04
Irons does a decent job of relating the history of the U.S. Supreme Court in an "easy to understand" manner. What this means is that he tries to paint a folksy picture of the people and issues surrounding the major court decisions of the past two centuries--he basically summarizes the major decisions, briefly explains why they're important, and then tells you his opinion and why it is correct. The book gives the reader nothing that your standard constitutional law reader does not--in fact, it gives less historical substance, compared with Kutler's book--but the appeal of this book is that it reads more like a novel and less like a history. Apparently some people like others to do their thinking for them. I do not, so I only found this book to be of minimal use. I wish that someone would have warned me about the book before I wasted my time on it, so hopefully I can prevent similar disappointment to someone else.
Good for history, bad for legal analysis.......2006-09-29
I give the author credit for explicitly revealing his biases in the book's opening pages. The author is a war protesting, left-leaning, liberal, and is a proponent of a "living Constitution" that conforms to his own ideas of a perfect society, rather than a view that treats the Constitution as a legal text. I strongly disagree with his views, but because he does not present his biases as fact, but instead openly warns the reader, I was able to continue reading.
The book's best feature is its compelling and detailed treatment of the Supreme Court's history. The author undoubtedly spent many hours parsing through obscure legal and historical materials to present the reader with a view of the factual circumstances surrounding the major legal developments of the past 200 years. As someone not very well-versed in American history, I appreciated the author's sensitive treatment of that subject.
Perhaps because of the author's biases, the first half of the book reads better than the latter half. I got the impression that I was reading a fairly objective account of the Constitution's framing and of the Civil War era. However, when discussing more recent developments, the author does not resist his urge to launch into juvenile tirades against those who have viewpoints diverse from his.
His legal analysis is generally flawed, and suffers from overt biases. He argues that it is a "dubious proposition" that the 14th amendment only applies to state action. This is strange, given that that amendment plainly states, "No *state* shall..." Scholars on both sides of the ideological debate understand that the 14th amendment was passed to bar only states from denying persons the equal protection of the law, but the author is not happy about that. Thus, he explodes into a meaningless rant about how anyone who thinks that that amendment is limited to state (as opposed to federal action as well) is a deceptive liar. As the book progresses to speak of the more controversial issues of the day, the author's biases speak louder and louder; I found myself skimming the last 150 pages, not trusting a single word that was coming out of his mouth.
That being said, I am quite happy that I read the book. It is not a great book, but it is well worth reading for its extensive historical analysis. And when the author does not launch into attacks against conservatives, he does add considerable insight to an important subject.
Three stars.
Amazon.com
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist sets a simple goal for himself: "This book is designed to convey to the interested, informed layman, as well as lawyers who do not specialize in constitutional law, a better understanding of the role of the Supreme Court in American government." He succeeds fabulously. The Supreme Court, an updated version of a book originally published in 1987, is a succinct and readable account of the Court's past and present. Rehnquist avoids getting bogged down in the minutia of particular cases, even as he deftly covers the details of several extremely important ones, such as Marbury v. Madison and Dred Scott v. Sandford.
The most interesting parts of the book explain how the current Court goes about its business. In these fascinating chapters, Rehnquist consistently includes nifty touches, such as how his law clerks decide who gets to work on which cases and the strict seating protocol that is followed when the nine justices--and nobody else--sit in conference to discuss their votes. If there's a knock on the door, it's the most junior justice who must answer. They don't really discuss cases at all during these meetings, but rather state their views. "I do not believe that conference discussion changes many votes," writes the Chief Justice. Oral arguments, on the other hand, are different: "In a significant minority of the cases in which I have heard oral argument, I have left the bench feeling differently about a case than I did when I came to the bench."
Rehnquist briefly lays out his own theory of jurisprudence in a short concluding chapter: "Go beyond the language of the Constitution, and the meaning that may be fairly ascribed to the language, and into the consciences of individual judges, is to embark on a journey that is treacherous indeed." Yet The Supreme Court largely skips comment on existing controversies, such as abortion rights, race-based policies, or the outcome of the 2000 presidential election. The book is exactly what Rehnquist promises: An accessible and enlightening introduction to a vital institution. --John J. Miller
Book Description
This new edition of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist’s classic book offers a lively and accessible history of the Supreme Court. His engaging writing illuminates both the high and low points in the Court's history, from Chief Justice Marshall’s dominance of the Court during the early nineteenth century through the landmark decisions of the Warren Court. Citing cases such as the Dred Scott decision and Roosevelt's Court-packing plan, Rehnquist makes clear that the Court does not operate in a vacuum, that the justices are unavoidably influenced by their surroundings, and that their decisions have real and lasting impacts on our society.
The public often hears little about the Supreme Court until decisions are handed down. Here, Rehnquist reveals its inner workings--the process by which cases are chosen, the nature of the conferences where decisions are made, and the type of debates that take place. With grace and wit, this incisive history gives a dynamic and informative account of the most powerful court in the nation and how it has shaped the direction America has taken.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent introduction to the Supreme Court.......2007-07-28
I was pleasantly surprised by this introduction to the Supreme Court. It is written in accessible prose that covers the history of the Court and Rehnquist's own experiences as a law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson and as a judge on the Court. His own experiences illuminate the duties of the law clerk and the justices and how cases come to, and are decided by, the Supreme Court. The process of petitioning for a writ of certiorari to oral arguments and finally to conferences are brought to life by Rehnquist's accounts.
The book's history of the court is lucid, providing the historical context, the details of most important cases, and the ramifications of the decisions. Renqhist begins with the most important case, Marbury vs. Madison (during the Marshall Court), which established judicial review of the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. What is made crystal clear is that the Court has evolved on many levels. The number of judges and their court rooms have change. The federal judiciary and the duties of the judges have changed. (Early on the judges had to travel and decided cases on the regional appeal circuit. Later Congress set-up the regional, federal appeals circuit courts, relieving the Supreme Court of the growing numbers of federal appeals cases.). The way cases reach the Supreme Court has changed and the influence of the Supreme Court has grown in importance. But what is also clear is that Supreme Court hasn't always gotten it right (the Dred Scott case) nor has it shied away from overturning precedent (Brown vs. the Board of Education). On the other hand, it often gets it right and is alive with relevance in the time decisions are made and through the careful work of the thoughtful men and women that make up the Court.
The book is non-ideological and Rehnquist stops his history after the Warren Court. As an act of respect and dignity he did not comment on the present Court members or their decisions.
"The Supreme Court" is Supreme.......2007-06-10
This is a great book for those who want to learn about the workings and history of the U.S. Supreme Court. Former Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote brilliantly and in a way where any layperson could understand and gain further knowledge about the highest court in our land. For anyone who wants to learn more about the Supreme Court and understand its importance to our country, this book is a must.
Solid Introduction the Supreme Court.......2007-02-05
Having served on the Supreme Court for over 33 years, William Rehnquist has an excellent vantage point to provide his readers with a very solid introduction to the nation's highest court. The first half of this book is a very readable and informative overview of the history of the court including Marbury v. Madison, the Dred Scott case, FDR's failed court packing plan, and the Steel Seizure case. Out of the many larger-than-life figures in this choronology, John Marshall stands pre-eminently as the most influential in the court's history (and one of the most underrated in the founding of our nation). The second half of the book deals with the administrative workings of the Supreme Court and is described in more detail and better than any outsider could.
It can be difficult to organize the history of any institution into clearly delineated sections and the Supreme Court is certainly no exception. Rehnquist chose to break down his history in chapters named after the most prominent judges (not always the Chief Justice). For the most part, this works well, but the introduction of new judges would always lead to digressions into their backgrounds which can be distracting and would probably have been best left to appendices for the more minor characters. Rehnquist's own personal observations are mostly very insightful, but there are a few (notably his conversation with his landlord and his delayed plane trip) did not add much value to the reader.
One issue to take note of is that the author deliberately ends his history with the conclusion of the Warren Court in order note to comment on any of the cases he has been directly involved in. This leaves the reader with gap of over 30 years from the end of the history to the present day.
Fascinating personal experience but spotty history.......2006-11-10
The highlight of this book for me were those chapters that dealt directly with the author's personal experience. At the age of twenty-seven he drove a heaterless Studebaker from his home in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in midwinter to start his first job in the legal profession, clerking for Supreme Court Associate Justice Jackson. He describes his initial experiences as a clerk and his impressions of the justices who served at that time, especially Frankfurter and Douglas. One case that made a particularly strong impression upon him concerned Truman's seizure of steel mills during the Korean War. The concern about abuse of Presidential power, seen at close range here, is extended in the book to a chapter devoted to FDR's attempt to pack the Court. He does not go into lengthy detail about his particular experiences as an Associate Justice and then as Chief Justice, but the three chapters on how cases are chosen, oral arguments presented, and cases decided are very interesting. He lists what he views as the different types of lawyers who present oral arguments, and blends his own experience in mentioning what a memorable and pressure-cooker situation it can be for those doing the presenting.
The problem with the historical part of the book is that it is very selectively focused and somewhat wanting in broadly addressing the issues involved. He provides helpful background concerning the railroad monopolies and the struggles of farmers to lessen the control of middle men, but in other instances of the laissez-faire economics of the industrial revolution, I have to question whether he is telling the full story. For a very long time, the balance between the monopoly power of the few at the expense of the welfare of the community was weighing heavily toward the few. When the New Deal came along, it may have shifted the balance too far the other way, but coming on the heels of the Great Depression, it did finally provide for worker's rights which could only be of positive benefit to the community. The Court packing chapter was interesting and FDR certainly sounds like he overstepped his bounds, but at the same time there were other things going on in the Court that were of historical significance and it is notable that people at that time faced many hardships. In the same vein, he could have written more about Brown vs. Board of Education, especially since he was a clerk at the Court at least part of the time during which the case was considered: In particular, the story of the rather remarkable feat that resulted in an unanimous decision, and also the events leading up to that decision, especially those efforts to right wrongs after the Civil War. He may have made good points about the Radical Republicans overstepping their bounds but there were also other things going on at the time.
Whatever side of the ideological fence you may be on, I think that Bernard Schwartz's book HISTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT gives a broader and easier to grasp view of Supreme Court history that includes more about constitutional trends and is less bogged down in dry detail even though it no doubt offers more.
all politics are not local .......2006-08-19
The late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist provides a wonderful and lucid historical look at the Court's continual fight to maintain its standing as a co-equal, independent partner in government.
In easy to read langauge, Rehnquist provides a great analysis of important cases and thier background. It's vivid history pops off the page and grabs you as you travel through time with the Court. History buffs will really enjoy this book.
Books:
- They Just Don't Get It: How Washington Is Still Compromising Your Safety--and What You Can Do About It
- United States V. George W. Bush et al.
- Universal Principles of Design: 100 Ways to Enhance Usability, Influence Perception, Increase Appeal, Make Better Design Decisions, and Teach Through Design
- Unplugged: Reclaiming Our Right to Die in America
- Web and Software Development: A Legal Guide (With CD-ROM)
- Wild Justice
- Win Your Child Custody War: Child Custody Help Source Book--A How-To System for People Serious About the Welfare of Their Child (11th Edition)
- 2006 International Plumbing Code - Softcover Version (International Plumbing Code)
- A Dark and Bloody Ground: The Hurtgen Forest and the Roer River Dams, 1944-1945
- Adult Nurse Practitioner Certification Review
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Saving for Retirement without Living Like a Pauper or Winning the Lottery
- Jemima J: A Novel About Ugly Ducklings and Swans
- Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics
- Electrocrystallization: Fundamentals of Nucleation and Growth
- History of Japanese Art
- Lameness: Recognizing and Treating the Horse's Most Common Ailment
- Great Pal Kitten
- The Creative Process: Reflections on the Invention in the Arts and Sciences
- Flying Dutchman: Motion in Architecture
- Controlled Reproduction in Sheep and Goats
Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court
The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court
The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court
Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas
