History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)

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.

Justice for All: Earl Warren and the Nation He Made

Average customer rating:

A masterpiece
A Great Biography, History and Cultural Review
Superlative work
Well-written overall, but one big omission - Japanese detentions
Still drafting in his wake

Justice for All: Earl Warren and the Nation He Made
Jim Newton
Manufacturer: Riverhead Hardcover
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Political | Leaders & Notable People | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Lawyers & Judges | Professionals & Academics | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Legal History | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Biographies | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 1594489289
Release Date: 2006-10-05

Book Description

A masterful biography of the legendary chief justice of the United States and chairman of the Warren Commission by an award-winning journalist, using previously unavailable government documents and scores of new interviews that cast new light on this crucial figure in U.S. history.

Earl Warren played a key role in nearly every defining political moment in American history in the latter half of the twentieth century. He began as an aggressive county prosecutor offended by graft and vice, then rose through California politics. As attorney general and governor, he led the country's fastest-growing state during a time of enormous change, his support for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II one of the few blemishes on an otherwise progressive record. From his historic governorship to his pivotal years as chief justice to his role as chairman of the commission that investigated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Warren traversed the Depression and the Cold War, the struggles to defend America against foreign enemies, and the emergence of a muscular commitment to individual liberty.

As chief justice from 1953 to 1969, Warren refashioned the place of the Supreme Court in American life, overseeing cases that desegregated schools (Brown v. Board of Education), established a constitutional right of privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut), outlawed prayer in public schools (Engel v. Vitale), created a right to counsel in state trials (Gideon v. Wainwright), codified voting rights (Baker v. Carr), and revolutionized police procedure (Miranda v. Arizona). Through those cases, Warren became a target for conservative ideologues, but he also carved a place for himself as one of the Court's most respected justices and reconstructed American society into the institutions and values it upholds today.

James S. Newton brings readers the first truly complete consideration of Earl Warren, taking advantage of unprecedented access to governmental, academic, and private documents pertaining to Warren's life, as well as the extensive cooperation of Warren's living children and associates. Newton illuminates both the public and the private Warren, the father of six whose own father was murdered, the stoic leader of the Masons who was touched by the difficulties of children, the sturdy yet prickly man. The result is a monumental biography of a complicated and principled figure that will become a seminal work of twentieth-century American history.

Customer Reviews:

A masterpiece.......2007-04-11

Jim Newton's biography of Earl Warren, "Justice for All", is a comprehensive and richly written book about one of the great Chief Justices in our nation's history. Warren, a moderately conservative man in temperament, style and often idea, led the Court through one of the most tumultuous times in recent memory. Revered and reviled as he might have been, his legacy is certainly one of notable accomplishments and Newton captures it well.

The author presents Earl Warren in a generally favorable light, reminding us of some of his catastrophic decisions, too....especially his support for the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War. For a moderate, almost non-partisan Republican, Warren had terrific success as governor of California propelling him into the national limelight with only one real political miscalculation of consequence...his agreeing to be Thomas Dewey's Vice Presidential running mate in 1948. Here begins the real fascinating part of Newton's book...politics. Whether it was Earl Warren's tenure as governor, or later dealing with the many presidents he knew or the intricacies of the personalities on the Court, Newton is terrific at describing political process. As Warren was a Republican it was interesting to read that the three Republicans he knew who were or would become president...Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford....were ones with whom Warren had the most troubles. (The descriptions of Richard Nixon add some good humor to the book!) The Chief Justice thought the most highly of President Kennedy, we learn, and he at least got along reasonably well with Lyndon Johnson.

There are many court cases, of course, cited in this book. They are fascinating to read about, especially how often slim majorities hung in the balance, finally decided by Earl Warren's persuasive powers. Newton speaks a great deal about Warren's family and this is much to his credit...so often in these biographies families are put on the back shelf. Here, they are front and center. If I had one small negative thing to say it would be that as the book progresses the author's fondness for his subject becomes much more apparent. "Justice for All" never approaches a hagiography, but occasionally it appears headed in that direction. Other than that, Jim Newton has written a superlative book and I highly recommend it for two reasons....to remind those of us who remember Earl Warren of his towering presence as Chief Justice and for those too young to remember him but who want to learn more.

A Great Biography, History and Cultural Review.......2007-03-29

This is a great story about a pivotal figure in 20th century American history. Before reading this, I knew Warren primarily as the Chief Justice and chair of the Warren Commission. However, I didn't realize that Warren was a fellow Cal grad, California 3-term governor, and DA for the county I've lived in for 10 years.

As such, this book is a fascinating history of California in addition to it's other topics.

Another note; one reviewer claims that this book glosses over Warren's role in the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. My impression, was that Warren's role was described in fascinating detail, including his behind-the-scenes politicking which contributed to the Japanese being interned. Also, the author revisits this decision during the remainder of the book, commenting about how this controversial move colored Warren's outlook for the rest of this life.

Superlative work.......2007-03-16

Since there is so much I want to read I usually don't read more than one biography of anybody and I had already read two of Earl Warren:
1827 Super Chief: Earl Warren and his Supreme Court A Judicial Biography, by Bernard Schwartz (read 19 Feb 1984)
3114 Chief Justice: A Biography of Earl Warren, by Ed Cray (read 26 Sep 1998)
So I was surprised that I decided to read this book. But not reading it would have been a big mistake This is an extraordinarily well-done work, telling the story of a man whose contributions to our country as we now know it are huge. The author has a sure grasp for the momentous events in which Warren was involved, and I have not read a more interest-holding biography in years. So even if you think you know all there is to know about the man who turned out to be the greatest Chief Justice in our nation's history, you should read this excellent account of a vitally important man.

Well-written overall, but one big omission - Japanese detentions.......2007-03-05

Newton does well in looking at some of Warren's more controversial prosecutions as Alameda County (Oakland) district attorney, and as California attorney general.

But, he basically skips over Oovernor Earl Warren's part in the Japanese deportations in World War II.

The rest of the book is great, from the different difficult cases, to the background interviews with family and friends, through the Warren Commission and more. (I never realized how Jerry Ford was pipelining stuff to J. Edgar Hoover when he wasn't being an obstructionist.)

But, because Newton doesn't tackle this issue, or Warren's later thoughts on it, at all, to be honest, a potentially great book slips to four stars.

Still drafting in his wake.......2007-02-19

Earl Warren's is a biography that pays revisiting, especially now that the political center he represented is so thin and the political virtues he practiced so derided. He was an uncomplicated, direct, and plain-spoken man who nevertheless, as Chief Justice, produced astonishing results. Brown vs. the Board of Education provided the essential legal fulcrum of the Civil Rights movement that transformed America in the last half of the 20th century. Perhaps this simplicity and clear vision was the key to his effectiveness.

How to explain the contradictions in Warren's life? Eisenhower was famously unhappy with his appointee. Warren, as Chief Justice, took positions that contradicted what Warren himself, as a District Attorney and Governor, had in fact practiced. No wonder Ike was pole-axed by the Chief Justice he got. The answer seems to be that Warren focused on using the tools each office provided to advance a consistent philosophy, equal justice for all.

Also interesting is the counterpoint and interplay of the careers of Warren and Richard Nixon. Nixon plainly drafted in Warren's wake and converted to the uses of his ambition political capital Warren had accumulated, especially when he crawled over Warren's presidential ambitions to secure the nomination as Vice-President. Yet two politicians were never more dissimilar than Warren and Nixon, the one open, natural, sociable, and comfortable in his skin, the other so contrived and fabricated as to stand for the least likely politician in recent history. But Nixon feigned the virtues Warren possessed in abundance: another way he drafted in Warren's wake. When Nixon hid lies and inconsistencies behind prefaces that he was about to make things "perfectly clear," he aped only Warren's political prose, not Warren's philosophy.

Jim Newton is a writer Warren would have enjoyed talking to and might have hired as a speechwriter. His prose is direct and his explanations of otherwise thorny and obscure legal issues easily penetrable. Warren deserves a better and grander reputation than he has merited at the hands of the neo-conservatives who have taken over the Court and Court punditry. Newton is an able advocate for a reappraisal. Warren did much more good for the county than serve as the exemplar of evil judicial activism. Absent Warren would Clarence Thomas today be on the Supreme Court? Perhaps the only irony of Warren's career is that so few followed in his footsteps, but so many neo-Nixons are still drafting in his wake.

Average customer rating:

(RAW Rating: 4.5) - What is happening to black men?
Why Are So Many Black Men In Prison? A Comprehensive Account Of How And Why The Prison Industry Has Become A Predatory Entity In
A Must Read
Why are so many Black Men in Prison?
Why are so many blacks in prison?

Why Are So Many Black Men in Prison?
Demico Boothe
Manufacturer: Xlibris Corporation
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Penology | Crime & Criminals | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

War on Drugs | Crime & Criminals | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 1425713971

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.

M'Culloch V. Maryland: Securing a Nation (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

Average customer rating:

M'Culloch V. Maryland: Securing a Nation (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)
Mark Robert Killenbeck
Manufacturer: University Press of Kansas
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

Legal History | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

Financial | English Law | Law | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0700614737

Book Description

Federalism-including its meanings and limits-remains one of the most contested principles in constitutional law. To fully understand its importance, we must turn to a landmark decision nearly two centuries old. M'Culloch v. Maryland (1819) is widely regarded as the Supreme Court's most important and influential decision-one that essentially defined the nature and scope of federal authority and its relationship to the states. Mark Killenbeck's sharply insightful study helps us understand why.

Killenbeck recounts how the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank of the United States refused to pay Maryland's tax on the bank and how that act precipitated a showdown in the Supreme Court, which addressed two questions: whether the U.S. Congress had the authority to establish a national bank and whether Maryland's tax on the bank was barred by the Constitution. In one of Chief Justice John Marshall's most famous opinions, the Court unanimously answered yes to both, authorizing the federal government to exercise powers not expressly articulated in the Constitution-and setting an alarming precedent for states' rights advocates.

The issues at the heart of M'Culloch are as important today as they were then: the nature and scope of federal constitutional authority, the division of authority between federal and state governments, and the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting and applying the Constitution. Situating the case within the protracted debate about the bank and about federal-state relations, the Panic of 1819, the fate of the Second Bank following the Court's momentous decision, and the ever-expanding and increasingly contentious debate over slavery, Killenbeck's book provides a virtual constitutional history of the first fifty years of the nation. As such, it shows that the development of the Constitution as a viable governing document took place over time and that M'Culloch, with its very broad reading of federal power, marked a turning point for the Constitution, the Court, and the nation.

As the Court continues to reshape the boundaries of federal power, M'Culloch looms large as a precedent in a debate that has never been fully settled. And as states today grapple with such questions as abortion, gay rights, medical marijuana, or assisted suicide, this book puts that precedent in perspective and offers a firm grasp of its implications for the future.

This book is part of the Landmark Law Cases and American Society series.

Average customer rating:
What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision
Jack Balkin
Manufacturer: NYU Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books
General | Law | Subjects | Books
Legal History | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books
Legal History | Perspectives on Law | Law | Professional & Technical | Subjects | Books
General | Political Doctrines | Political Science | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

What Brown v. Board of Education Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Landmark Civil Rights Decision

Roe V. Wade: The Abortion Rights Controversy in American History (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

America's Constitution: A Biography

The Choices We Made: Twenty-Five Women and Men Speak Out About Abortion

Revolution by Judiciary: The Structure of American Constitutional Law

ASIN: 0814799183
Release Date: 2005-08-01

Book Description

View the Table of Contents. Read the Introduction.

“Brings together some of America's brightest legal minds to make the best arguments available for and against the constitutional right to abortion. An exceptional volume and essential for anyone who wants to understand the constitutional debate about Roe.”
—Nadine Strossen, President, American Civil Liberties Union, and Professor of Law, New York Law School

"The interest of the whole lies precisely in its depiction within a single volume of where the debate stands."
—Federal Lawyer

"Reading Jack Balkin's edited book, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said, conjures up thoughts in the reader, like 'darn, I wish I had thought of that.'"
—The Law and Politics Book Review

“This array of intelligent and serious alternatives to the Court's stunningly inadequate opinion in Roe v. Wade —some reaching the same, some the opposite conclusion, some in between —is the most convincing argument against any litmus test on this subject either way for future Supreme Court Justices.”
—Charles Fried, Harvard Law School

"Whatever beliefs you may hold concerning these issues, you will find those beliefs subjected to thoughtful--even passionate--challenge in at least one of these opinions."
—Kenneth L. Karst, UCLA School of Law

"What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said provides vigorous and diverse substitute opinions by leading scholars that broaden, deepen, and improve the current debates while sharpening what a supreme court can and cannot do on such a highly disputed matter."
—Martha Minow, Harvard Law School

"In an era in which it's entirely possible that someone else is actually going to get to reimagine what Roe v. Wade should have said, this book is an interesting fantasy excercise."
—Bitch

In January 1973, the Supreme Court's opinion in Roe v. Wade struck down most of the country's abortion laws, and held for the first time that women had a constitutional right to safe and legal abortions. Three decades later, Roe v. Wade remains one of the Supreme Court's most controversial decisions, and political struggles over abortion rights still divide American politics. Roe has emerged as a central issue in federal judicial nominations, becoming a powerful symbol in debates about judicial restraint, judicial activism, and the proper role of courts in a democratic society.

In What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said, eleven distinguished constitutional scholars rewrite the opinions in this landmark case in light of thirty years of experience but making use only of sources available at the time of the original decision. Taking positions both for and against the constitutional right to abortion, the contributors offer novel and illuminating arguments that get to the heart of this fascinating case. In addition, Jack Balkin gives a detailed introduction to Roe v. Wade,chronicling the history of the Roe litigation, the constitutional and political clashes that followed it, and the state of abortion rights in the U.S. today.

Contributing their versions of Roe are: Anita Allen, Akhil Amar, Jack M. Balkin, Teresa Stanton Collett, Michael Stokes Paulsen, Jeffrey Rosen, Jed Rubenfeld, Reva Siegel, Cass Sunstein, Mark Tushnet, and Robin West.

Average customer rating:

The title says it all............
possibly the most unknown founding father
An excellent book about an excellent man
An excellent biography and overview of early American history from a different perspective
Great book

John Marshall: Definer of a Nation
Jean Edward Smith
Manufacturer: Henry Holt and Co.
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

General | Historical | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Political | Leaders & Notable People | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Lawyers & Judges | Professionals & Academics | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Civil Procedure | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 080501389X

Amazon.com

It's taken for granted today that the Supreme Court has final say on how the Constitution is interpreted, but this principle--hotly debated in the republic's early years -- was established by John Marshall (1755-1835), the fourth Chief Justice. Historian Smith's definitive biography, detailed and lucid, is a model of scholarly writing for the general public. The author claims our admiration for the justice and sparks affection for the man: warm, gregarious, fond of drink, a Federalist with the common touch, a seasoned political infighter who remained on good terms with his opponents.

Book Description

A New York Times Notable Book of 1996

It was in tolling the death of Chief Justice John Marshall in 1835 that the Liberty Bell cracked, never to ring again. An apt symbol of the man who shaped both court and country, whose life "reads like an early history of the United States," as the Wall Street Journal noted, adding: Jean Edward Smith "does an excellent job of recounting the details of Marshall's life without missing the dramatic sweep of the history it encompassed."

Customer Reviews:

The title says it all...................2007-08-15

.....though we can still debate whether he defined it correctly. John Marshall, fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was, and remains, one of the absolute giants of our history. Washington fought the battles, Jefferson and Madison composed the theories, but it remained for Marshall to elucidate what it all meant. This is, to my mind, the definitive biography of a titan.

John Marshall was born in what is now Northern Virginia in 1755, the child of a fairly well off family. On his mother's side, he was descended from the famous Randolphs; his father was a surveying associate of George Washington. His dad taught him a love of education and good books that continued all his days. Before embarking on a career in Law, Marshall was a soldier of the Revolution, serving with Washington in several major battles. After marriage to young Polly Ambler, he was a law student of the great George Wythe [also the law teacher of Jefferson, and of Spencer Roane] at William & Mary. Successful practice, and politics, soon followed...Marshall served on the Governor's Council, and was the leading advocate for Constitutional ratification in the Virginia convention; his battles with Patrick Henry are the stuff of legend [though they served as co-counsel in several cases]. He was a constant supporter of Washington, served as one of Adams' three ministers to France in the XYZ affair, and was briefly a Congressman and Secretary of State. He it was who said of Washington "First in War...", though he let Light Horse Harry Lee speak the words, and get the credit. In 1801, John Adams made a "midnight appointment" of Marshall to be Chief Justice, preventing the incoming President Jefferson from making his own choice...

For the next 34 years, Marshall solidified Federal power, freely interpreting the interstate commerce clause, and the clause which allows Congress to make enabling legislation. Marbury v. Madison asserted the right of judicial review, and further cases expanded it. He wrote the judicial opinions that remain the basis of Federal centrilization of power to this day. Smith gives great detail of individual cases.

One of Marshall's great strengths, and we shouldn't make light of it, was that he was a nice guy. A sociable host, his friends loved him, but even total strangers could find him thoroughly modest and charming. Quoits, and good Madiera were real passions. Even his enemies [with two profound exceptions] liked him. His basic decency certainly aided his consensus building.....

...the two exceptions were Spencer Roane and Thomas Jefferson. Roane was the son-in-law and political ally of Patrick Henry. A long time neighbor of Marshall, and Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court, Judge Roane believed completely in States Rights and held the US Constitution to be a voluntary compact of free and independent states that could be broken at will. What Spencer Roane proposed, Jeff Davis disposed... Alas, where Marshall was a prince among men, Judge Roane was of such acid, unpleasant, temperment that even his friends and allies couldn't stand him...

....and then there was Mr. Jefferson. The feud between Marshall and Jefferson is one of the absolute central themes of American history. It was multidimensional...personal, familial, political, philosophical...for about 40 years, the conflict was one of cordial, respectful, dislike; after the Aaron Burr treason trial of 1807, it turned into blind, unreasoning hatred. Part of it was rivalry between branches of the Randolph family; part was Jefferson's civilian service during the revolution while Marshall was in the field; part was publication of a letter to Jefferson from his daughter stating "Mrs. Marshall is insane" [sadly, true]. Mostly, the problem was that Marshall and Jefferson had totally different theories of government and visions of America. [They agreed about religion, though Marshall was a founder of, and regular attender at, Monumental Church in Richmond]. In 1807, Aaron Burr was charged with treason, accused of wanting to set up his own empire. He was tried in Richmond, with Marshall sitting as trial judge. Marshall's friend, neighbor, and occasional law partner John Wickham served as defense counsel, along with the drunken genius, Luther Martin. In what is today generally considered a rigged trial, Burr was acquitted. During this trial, an incident occured that is the only evidence of improper conduct on John Marshall's part that I can find; while Burr was out on bail, Wickham threw a grand dinner party for him. Marshall was invited [not improper], went, and stayed the whole evening. You can well imagine the spin that sympathetic Jefferson biographers put on this; Smith doesn't mention it.

John Marshall was a great and brilliant man; he was also a good and decent man. He had his problems; Polly was an invalid with a combination of physical and mental problems for years...one of his sons was essentially worthless. Thru it all, John Marshall was faithful to both his public and private duties. Now, I'll get personal....my copy of this wonderful book was a Christmas present my wife bought me at the John Marshall House in Richmond. Located at 9th. and Marshall, near the Capitol, it is lovingly maintained by a fine staff of really nice people [the Director even helped me with research for a small biography I wrote of Spencer Roane]. The house, and Marshall's grave in Shockhoe Cemetery a few blocks away, are cared for as monuments to greatness, which they are. The house is nice, but not spectacular; Marshall was a modest, unassuming man [John Wickham's house, two blocks away, IS spectacular]. At the John Marshall House [yes, I contribute financially], and at his grave, I feel awe, intellectual interest, and profound respect; at Monticello, I feel reverence. Maybe I think Jefferson was right about the issues, but I can still look up to John Marshall. If you want to understand America, you need to read this book.

This is the best available biography of Marshall, maybe the best ever. If all you want is case histories, read Hobson; if you want a highly technical biography, read Newmyer; if you want to understand the great cases, AND the great man who decided them, start right here. Newmyer and Hobson wrote fine books, but any intelligent person [not just specialists] can read this one.....

possibly the most unknown founding father.......2007-03-14

I think it can be argued that, next to Washington, Marshall was the most significant of the whole colonial group, and fortunately, this excellent biography rises to the occasion, telling the story of this truly remarkable American. The best proof of my enthusiasm for the book is that I have already purchased four copies for friends with more undoubtedly to come

An excellent book about an excellent man.......2007-02-11

The court says what the law is. That simple, now obvious precept comes from John Marshall more than any other founder. Whether the United States would be a fractious loose confederation of competiting states or truly united states with an agreed set of rules was the enormous question of the Revolution. Through bumps and starts, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Monroe, Adams and their less well known but hugely effective partisans proposed conflicting approaches to the way the country would be governed. These men of ideas and politics had to have a final place where their competing philosophies and general beliefs could be hammered into practical law. A trial brings a real problem against the idea behind a law. John Marshall said the Supreme Court was the final place for reconciliation of thought and practice. Marshall thought and wrote with such clarity, reason and discipline that he was able to convince even presidents who disliked him ( he worked with 5 of them), state legislatures and the public that the Court's findings were reasonable and necessary.

America, before and after the Revolution was not in the least united. Civl wars and succession were threatened regularly by competing proponents of individual, state and federal rights --and even who was intended when the "individual" rights were debated. The conflicts about the purpose of government was vastly complicated by the rise of political parties, by partisanship and the explosive growth of an economy and social strata unlike the rest of the world. By the time Marshall was appointed to the bench by John Adams, there was no agreed national philosophy to guide the country's decisions. Marshall said the Constitution was law, not suggestion. Today that fact seems so obvious that it takes a stretch to appreciate what Marshall achieved. His unwavering adherance (and careful avoidance of what he saw as unecessary conflict) to the idea that the president was responsible for politics (guiding national direction)and international relations, congress was responsible for making the laws, and the court was responsible for ensuring that the laws were congruent with the Constitution built the bones of this country.

It cheers me that Marshall, according to Jean Smith (and a shorter biography by Gordon Woods) is nearly the ideal founder that his more famous contemporaries certainly were not. Marhsall was a man of simple, gracious manners, apparently not adept in high scociety, but genial and welcoming in small gatherings who was happy to add Madiera to aid discussion. His open minded and unpretentious approach to others allowed him to obtain unanimous decisions from fellow jurists who were not without ego and ideas of their own. He was astonishingly loyal to a wife who was a recluse. He started as a lawyer and legislator, but withdrew entirely from politics once he gained the bench, and was in fact the honorable, honest and intellectually immense presence that we want our founders to be.
Smith manages to keep this lengthy biography interesting, including informed and clear discussions of the context of the cases, the national temper and the personalities of participants. Smith is political science and law professor (but not a lawyer) with perhaps ten other histories to his credit. I demand a lot from a history(clarity, reason, context, support for argument and even the occasional sense of humor -- and without polemics) and Smith manages to do it all. He clearly is a Marshall fan but, from my other reading, Marshall deserves the respect and honor he gave his county.

An excellent biography and overview of early American history from a different perspective.......2006-09-01

What a book and what a topic for a non-lawyer, early American history buff. I actually feel smarter now!

Seriously, Jean Edward Smith does a great job of pulling a tremendous amount of primary source material into a seamlessly integrated biography on US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall. In large part, because of all the primary source quotes, the book reads slowly, but without videos, photographs, and voice recordings, that's the best way to learn about historical figures from that era. Smith's own writing, research, and overall understanding of the material and ability to convey that to the reader is excellent.

I was not aware that John Marshall was so involved in Virginia politics after the War and was asked multiple times by fellow Virginian George Washington to take on major positions, only to be rebuffed. He was so highly admired even before he entered the Supreme Court. So, the first 300 pages cover Marshall's career leading up to his nomination. The next 200+ pages cover his tenure on the Supreme Court.

What is really nice, though, about the way Smith handles the biography, is that he constantly brings back recurring theme's in Marshall's life, whether it is Marshall's ability to get along with people from either side of the aisle and his remarkable affability and love of Madeira wine, or his plain old good judgment and belief in the supremacy of the Union, or his dedication to his job and the country and his ability to strengthen the Supreme Court by striving for unanimous decisions and collegiality among the individual Supreme Court justices.

And obviously, Smith does a good job of putting the importance of Marshall's decisions in perspective in his time and today. I've read perhaps 40 books on early American history, but John Marshall and the role of the Supreme Court has always been a black box or a side story. Smith does a great job of fleshing this out for me. Additionally, as always it is interesting to view history from different perspectives, and this book does a nice job of doing that all the way from the War of Independence through Andrew Jackson's reign.

Thank you Jean Edward Smith for your efforts.

Great book.......2006-07-05

I love early American history, the early Constitutional period to be more exact. I've read the biographies of many of our Founders but I have never read one about a Supreme Court justice. After visiting the Court's building in D.C. a few years back, I became interested in Marshall and found this book about his life.

This is a very informative book for the non-lawyers among us (like me) who want a layman's understanding on how the Supreme Court muscled its way onto the national stage. Sure, the Court was equal to the other two branches on paper. But Smith shows how Marshall flushed this "lowly" court into a genuine equal with the legislature and executive.

The author also gives a clear view on Marshall's thinking regarding the "state's rights vs national power" controversy that was at the forefront of the debate during those early years of the nation.

For those who want to understand the power of today's Supreme Court, this is a great place to learn its history.

Narrowing the Nation's Power: The Supreme Court Sides with the States

Average customer rating:

A Senior (Judge) Moment...
Exposing An Activist Court
Narrowing the Nation's Power

Narrowing the Nation's Power: The Supreme Court Sides with the States
John T. Noonan Jr.
Manufacturer: University of California Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Constitutions | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

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

History & Theory | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Courts | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

Torts | Business | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Professional & Technical | Subjects | Books

General | Americas | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0520240685

Book Description

Narrowing the Nation's Power is the tale of how a cohesive majority of the Supreme Court has, in the last six years, cut back the power of Congress and enhanced the autonomy of the fifty states. The immunity from suit of the sovereign, Blackstone taught, is necessary to preserve the people's idea that the sovereign is "a superior being." Promoting the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity to constitutional status, the current Supreme Court has used it to shield the states from damages for age discrimination, disability discrimination, and the violation of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and fair labor standards. Not just the states themselves, but every state-sponsored entity--a state insurance scheme, a state university's research lab, the Idaho Potato Commission--has been insulated from paying damages in tort or contract. Sovereign immunity, as Noonan puts it, has metastasized. "It only hurts when you think about it," Noonan's Yalewoman remarks.
Crippled by the states' immunity, Congress has been further brought to heel by the Supreme Court's recent invention of two rules. The first rule: Congress must establish a documentary record that a national evil exists before Congress can legislate to protect life, liberty, or property under the Fourteenth Amendment. The second rule: The response of Congress to the evil must then be both "congruent" and "proportionate." The Supreme Court determines whether these standards are met, thereby making itself the master monitor of national legislation. Even legislation under the Commerce Clause has been found wanting, illustrated here by the story of Christy Brzonkala's attempt to redress multiple rapes at a state university by invoking the Violence Against Women Act. The nation's power has been remarkably narrowed.
Noonan is a passionate believer in the place of persons in the law. Rules, he claims, are a necessary framework, but they must not obscure law's task of giving justice to persons. His critique of Supreme Court doctrine is driven by this conviction.

Download Description

Customer Reviews:

A Senior (Judge) Moment..........2004-03-27

This book comes as a disappointment. Prior to reading of Narrowing the Nation's Power, I had perused several reviews of it-some praising it and some panning it-and I was actually expecting to really enjoy the book and agree with all of its arguments. Unfortunately, I found myself underwhelmed after reading it.

The problem here is not that Senior Judge John Noonan lacks a great intellect-he is an experienced and respected academic and jurist. Nor is Judge Noonan a bad writer. I had read his book on "masks" the month before this work, and thoroughly enjoyed Judge Noonan's scholarship and insights.

The problem with Judge Noonan's book is that it is a lost opportunity. There ARE some very legitimate criticisms to be made of the U.S. Supreme Court's state sovereign immunity jurisprudence. Likewise, serious issues abound concerning the Supreme Court's claim to judicial supremacy as well as its employment of "balancing tests" in Section 5 (14th Amendment) cases, and in other cases. However, many of Judge Noonan's better points and critiques in these matters are obscured and lost by his incessant railing against the motives and hidden agendas of the justices with whom he disagrees.

Judge Noonan is to be praised for correctly noting that: "To make `federalism' a slogan for states' rights is to contort the original meaning and to suppress the national component in the original design." Yet, rather than relying upon solid textual and case law grounds in critiquing the state sovereign immunity and Section 5 subsets of the "New Federalism," Judge Noonan quotes the pre-amble of the Constitution and states that it is his "endeavor" to "lay them as criteria alongside the facts of particular cases and to ask if the results of these cases can be squared with the announced purposes of our constitution." He then employs the abstractions of the pre-amble to critique the views of justices with whom he disagrees while accusing those same justices of using the abstractions of federalism in their opinions. In so doing he ignores the important question of whether it is just for a governing authority to exceed its lawful limits.

The Section 5 cases receiving much of Judge Noonan's attention are Smith and Borne. I found it interesting, in the least, that Judge Noonan, the attacked the Supreme Court for its respect for the Mormon polygamy cases of the 19th Century. He dismissed them all in a simplistic fashion as discriminatory, when there are more complex issues at stake in those cases.

Of course, Judge Noonan is correct in criticizing the Supreme Court for calling Section 1 of 14th Amendment is "self-executing." For in so doing, the Supreme Court gives itself a monopoly over creating and defining the parameters of rights and determining their applicability in specific instances. And the Supreme Court has made use of its monopoly with a new test in Section 5 cases: "There must be a congruence and proportionality between the injury to be prevented or remedied and the means adopted to that end." Judge Noonan rightly criticizes the Supreme Court for adopting that test and for its use of special inspections of the congressional record for convincing evidence of the evils being legislated against, as mechanisms to second-guess the Congress and underme its duty under the Constitution.

The book takes a rather strange twist in Chapters 2 and 3, with Judge Noonan writing in the third person. Although somewhat distracting, he does manage to convey the mess that is the Ex Parte Young doctrine, with all its unpredictable and contradictory exceptions and exceptions to the exceptions' exceptions.

Since I do not at this stage of my legal career and education have a thorough understanding of patents and trademarks, I do not have any comments on Chapter 4, which deals with those subjects.

Judge Noonan's chapter on the Violence Against Women Act and the Commerce Clause is rather embarrassing, for he again employs attacks on the motives of the justices with whom he disagrees and gives the other justices a pass on problems in their own opinions (thereby seemingly accepting "process federalism.) Again, another blown opportunity, because there are some points to be made that that act could pass muster under the Commerce Clause in conjunction with the Necessary and Proper Clause.

This work is not without good insight and points, but those really have to be picked out from amongst all of the other, overly-simplistic and unfair charges that Judge Noonan makes.

Exposing An Activist Court.......2003-02-25

Judge Noonan does not need to hide behind difficult-to-understand legalese in order to expose the Rehnquist Court's 5-4 judicial activism. The book puts a human face on the individuals whose rights have been ignored by a bare majority of justices who are more interested in protecting the "dignity" of the States than the dignity of the People -- though that concern for State "dignity" was not apparent when the same 5 justices decided Bush v. Gore. Any educated reader will easily understand Judge Noonan's description of the Rehnquist Court's outrageous activisim -- a critique all the more stinging becausae it comes from a Reagan-appointed judge who has never been accused of being a "liberal." As Judge Noonan observes, the 5 justices' "intepretation" of the Constitution seems more like an interpretation of the Articles of Confederation -- a document that failed to provide for an effective and independant federal government, thereby requiring enactment of the Constitution in order to preserve the United States. Highly recommended for all -- but especially recommended for lawyers and law students, who need to understand this revolutionary return to the properly discredited States Rights movement.

Narrowing the Nation's Power.......2003-02-06

Narrowing the Nation's Power: The Supreme Court Sides with the States written by John T. Noonan, Jr. is a book about the current Supreme Court and the 11th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

What I found interesting is that the author writes in a style that is easily understood and the book is well-documented as he explains how the Supreme Court is swaying toward the States vs. Federal in its thinking. This is an age old debate whether to be more States Rights of Federal in thinking and to interpretation of the law. Ever since the government of the United States has been formed this debate has been around.

Does the Supreme Court systematically thwart justice to American through a states rights policy? The author makes a strong case and backs his judgement with case studies.

This book takes complex legal doctrine and makes it enjoyable to read. To better understand the laws of the land we have the courts and the final say rests with the Supreme Court. The book explains some of these cases... states' immunity in age discrimination, disability discrimination, and violation of patents, trademarks, copyrights, and fair labor... insulation from paying damages, are just a few of the case torts reviewed in this book.

Book Description

Available as a single volume or as part of the 10 volume set Supreme Court in American Society

Right Wing Justice: The Conservative Campaign to Take Over the Courts (Nation Books)

Average customer rating:

Right Wing Justice: The Conservative Campaign to Take Over the Courts (Nation Books)
Herman Schwartz
Manufacturer: Nation Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Courts | Procedures & Litigation | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

Political Parties | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

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

21st Century | World | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America

ASIN: 1560255668

Book Description

Right Wing Justice raises the alarm about the creeping conservative campaign to “pack” America’s courts with judges more identified with their ideological affiliation than their skill or regard for the Constitution. The consequence is that the rule of law is taking a terrific beating from the Supreme Court. Who can forget the debacle of Election 2000? But the consequences of the campaign go far deeper than that, impinging on the daily lives of ordinary Americans who are at the receiving end of attempts to overturn or erode Supreme Court rulings on abortion, school prayer, civil rights, criminal justice, and economic regulation. As the author shows, the problem does not end at the Supreme Court—it filters down to the lowers courts and circuits. Right Wing Justice gives an alarming account of how this has come to pass over the last two decades, how conservative activists hatched this strategy in the 1960s only to see it really come of age during the Reagan revolution and the successive Republican administrations. Combining a scholar's sense of history with the immediacy of eyewitness testimony, Right Wing Justice will come not only as a sobering reading to many concerned Americans—but also as a call to wake-up.

The Constitution in Crisis Times 1918-1969 (The New American Nation Series)

Average customer rating:

The Constitution in Crisis Times 1918-1969 (The New American Nation Series)
Paul L. Murphy
Manufacturer: Harpercollins College Div
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books

The Jacksonian Era, 1828 1848 (New American Nation Series)

ASIN: 0060131187

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books