Book Description
A scathing portrait of contemporary executive power run amok, by the author of the original 1976 Church Committee report on executive abuse.
"In thirty-four years, I have repeatedly seen an erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job."—Vice President Dick Cheney
Thirty years after the Church Committee unearthed COINTELPRO and other instances of illicit executive behavior on the domestic and international fronts, the Bush administration has elevated the flaws identified by the committee into first principles of government.
Through a constellation of non-public laws and opaque, unaccountable institutions, the current administration has created a "secret presidency" run by classified presidential decisions and orders about national security. A hyperactive Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice is intent on eliminating checks on presidential power and testing that power's limits. Decisions are routinely executed at senior levels within the civilian administration without input from Congress or the federal courts, let alone our international allies. Secret NSA spying at home is the most recent of these. Harsh treatment of detainees, "extraordinary renditions," secret foreign prisons, and the newly minted enemy combatant designation have also undermined our values. The resulting policies have harmed counterterrorism efforts and produced few tangible results.
With a partisan Congress predictably reluctant to censure a politically aligned president, it is all the more important for citizens themselves to demand disclosure, oversight, and restraint of sweeping claims of executive power. This book is the first step.
Customer Reviews:
Love the PW review- as always.......2007-07-10
I'm so glad we have the reader reviews on Amazon. The Publishers Weekly evaluations are often very biased and dismissive. "Though another book criticizing the Bush presidency is of questionable necessity" - really? We've reached the limit on books examining and critiquing the performance of the President of the United States? Thanks, PW! I'll stop worrying about the health of our democracy and go straight to bed.
"A Republic, If You Can Keep It".......2007-07-09
Benjamin Franklin, when asked what type of government we had created, is said to have replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." "Unchecked and Unbalanced" shows why America is in danger of being transformed into a monarchy by the Bush Administration, reporting how this new theory of unchecked presidential power developed and why it is wrong. The authors also contend that the theory is not a response to 9/11, but long nurtured by Cheney and his assistant David Addington from at least the days of the Iran-Contra investigation, and even followed (to a much lesser extent) by Bill Clinton.
Executive branch lawyers now describe an ongoing (not just emergency) power to set aside legal checks imposed by Congress and to even act when Congress is silent. This authority extends to treaties as well, and at least one Office of Legal Council (OLC) leader claims coverage of judicial decisions as well.
Lincoln acted early on at the start of the Civil war without Congressional authorization, and even ignored an order by the Chief Justice. The difference between Lincoln and Bush is that Lincoln did not do so on an on-going basis, sought subsequent approval, and did not act in secret.
"Unchecked and Unbalanced" provides rationale for concluding that OLC's conclusions are wrong; it also asserts that the OLC claims were developed without adherence to professional obligations - eg. they failed to identify, let alone respond to, weaknesses in their legal arguments, and failed to mention key Supreme Court cases.
Finally, to protect our republic, the authors recommend Congress hold hearings and act, and that the Supreme Court follow suit. Unfortunately this is made difficult by executive branch supervision of intelligence gathering and distribution.
Very dangerous premise.......2007-07-06
propounded here. For background, Schwarz was counsel for the Church Committee. It was that committee that emasculated the CIA, not allowing it to deal with foreign agents with any sort of criminal record (who does the spying; not the Boy Scouts) and putting up barriers for communications between U.S. intelligence agencies. All this lead directly to many of the problems of 9/11. Now, because of their hatred for Bush, these authors want to return to that Alice in Wonderland approach to national security. That's why this premise is so dangerous; our lives depend on it.
Responsibly Written - Well Researched.......2007-05-24
The authors documents how the Bush Administration, in an effort to fight terrorism, has side-stepped the constitution, circumvented the Geneva Convention, and broken countless other laws. The authors describe how the net result is an erosion of the moral character of America, which, in the long run, is counterproductive in the war on terror.
The right people to ring the alarm bells.......2007-05-07
Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr. is senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and a partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. He was chief counsel to the Church Committee. Aziz Z. Huq is associate counsel at the Brennan Center and previously clerked for the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a book you will not be able to put down, in which they demonstrate and document how the Bush administration has gone further than Nixon or Reagan ever dreamed to create a monarchical presidency with the acquiescence of a complicit Congress and a cowed judiciary.
Book Description
Kati Marton’s bestselling
Hidden Power is an engrossing look at twelve presidential marriages–from Edith and Woodrow Wilson to Laura and George W. Bush–that have profoundly affected America’s history.
Marton uncovers the behind-the-scenes dynamics of the ultimate power couples, showing how first ladies have used their privileged access to the president to influence staffing, promote causes, and engage directly in policy-making. Edith Wilson secretly ran the country after Woodrow’s debilitating stroke. Eleanor Roosevelt was FDR’s moral compass. And Laura Bush, initially shy of any public role, has proven to be the emotional ballast for her husband. Through extensive research and interviews, Marton reveals the substantial–yet often overlooked–legacy of presidential wives, providing insight into the evolution of women’s roles in the twentieth century and vividly depicting the synergy of these unique political partnerships.
Customer Reviews:
Preedential Marriages.......2007-01-19
This book concentrates on the Presidential Marriages in the 20th century, and how they impacted the shaping of decisions made in the White House by the Presidents. It has been said thatthe White House made some marriages and destroyed others. This is amply illustrated in this carefully researched book. The analysis of the Wilson marriages, Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt, as well as those who followed them, is very illuminating, and clarifies many of the events that occurred during the administrations
Disappointing, reflects only the popular view of First Ladies.......2006-10-25
This book is a bit too shallow; there is really nothing new or deep in it. I looked for some new insights into our recent First Ladies, but all the author produced was commonly held, popular views of them.
Snapshot look .......2006-03-26
I found this to be a good book for those of us who were not around when many of these first ladies were. This book can also be a stepping stone to picking up a complete bio on one or more of them.
Good Weekend Read.......2005-08-30
I haven't read the Clinton chapter yet, but on a whole the book doesn't seem to generate any bias. Her treatment of Nixon and Carter's wife seem fair. Each chapter seems relatively short, though, considering the context of history. Almost as if more detailed research could have been done on each wife. Overall the read is entertaining and positively predictable, written in a well thought-out pattern. The analogies comparing each one to the other, strengths and weaknesses are of value.
I am pro-Nixon, but I never really understood the gravity of Pat's dysfunctional situation. The Checker's speech made her seem so shallow that it propelled her into mediocrity for decades. I didn't read anything much of value with Nancy Reagan.
The Bush Sr. chapter is informative because I never really understood Barbara's role before....he was a weak leader in comparison to her rock solid attitudes. I recall during Reagan's presidency a poll demonstrated that about 70% of the public did not know their VP's name was.
Her witing is as grating as her voice!.......2004-09-01
My wife was given this book as a gift. I thought i would give it a try. I could not take any more than 1/2 hour of nausea. The witer subjects the reader to a journey of egotistical sermons, Someone should teach her her to take a breath and to tell herself that she does not have all the anwers. What a know-it-all chauvinistic person. I gave the book to my wife and she put it down afte 10 minutes. I then asked her what she had done wrong to the person who gifted her with the book to cause her to be subjected to this diatribe! I wish this woman wou;d stop nd listen to herself. I truly believe she xould stand a degree of humility.
Customer Reviews:
Classic, but outdated.......2005-04-20
Neustadt's work has been praised by many other reviewers here, and I won't disagree that this is a classic that must be read by any serious student of the American presidency. Nonetheless, his thesis is quite outdated and has been superceded by more recent scholarship.
Neustadt's fatal flaw is to assume that the individual person in the office is the only thing that matters - if that person has the right set of skills, he can successfully bargain to get his goals accomplished. However, he doesn't pay enough attention to the role other institutions may play in constraining the president's ability to get what he wants, or how increased presidential power may give the president new resources with which to deal with the other branches.
Neustadt also assumes that all presidents before FDR were "pre-modern" and "mere clerks of the office." This perspective has been proven false in several respects. First off, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson clearly acted like "modern" presidents in many respects. Secondly, there are numerous examples of "pre-modern" presidents acting like the modern ones: even the much-reviled Rutherford B. Hayes acted like the modern presidents when appointing executive branch officials. Others such as Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, Lincoln, etc., are left out altogether.
If you want to read cutting-edge work that deals with these shortcomings, take a look at Stephen Skowronek's book on the presidency instead.
Machiavelli in the White House.......2004-03-24
This is indeed one the classics in the field of presidential studies. Neustadt's contribution, although somewhat commonsensical at first glance, is that despite the huge increase in formal powers that the president has acquired over the years, the most fundamental power the president possesses is the power to persuade.
The president must persuade other independently elected officials to do as he sees fit. This, in a city such as Washington DC where people have seen powerful politicians come and go over the years, is easier said than done. The president must be attuned to the nuances of political issues and not allow himself to become cut off from the political back and forth by his retinue of aides. He must retain the prerogative of making the final political decision and avoid becoming a clerk and simply ratifying the decisions made form by the staff and the bureaucracy. Further, he must define what is in his political self interest.
The president does so by keeping himself informed, by employing a system of information that allows him to be at the center and making real decisions; and by carefully husbanding the power and carefully cultivating the image of the president. While the president does posses the power to command, instances where he must rely on command are a prima facie failure of persuasion.
Finally, the president must ensure that others understand his power. He must be able to strike a modicum of fear into both his allies and his foes. In the political sense, this means the ability to hurt someone electorally. If I as the president can campaign against you and make it stick, you will be more likely to fear me and be persuaded by my requests.
This is not an easy read, but if you are involved as a student of politics you WILL read this book at some point. A classic and well worth the effort.
John C. McKee
One of three seminal works on the Presidency.......2000-04-26
Neustadt's book describes one of three theories about Presidents. Everyone knows that there is a balance of power between the judiciary, the legislative and the executive branches. Neustadt claims that the President is the weak leg of the stool and that he is unable to govern alone. He must use his powers of persuasion in order to convince the other branches of the government to do his bidding.
As part of a graduate program in political science with a concentration on the United States, you will read this book. If you don't, I am happy to go out on a limb and say that there is something wrong with your program!
This is one of the three seminal works available on the Presidency. There are others but this is one of the big guns. If you read this book, along with Corwin's "Presidential Power" and Rossiter's "The American Presidency", you'll understand all three theories of presidential power: the weak President (Neustadt), the strong President (Corwin) and the President wearing many hats (Rossiter). In reality, all three are correct.
It's interesting but a scholarly read. It's not a book you'd pick up for light after dinner reading.
still useful after all these years..........2000-04-19
The 1960 edition of Presidential Power has had a long shelf-life, and has grown over time to append chapters on post-Eisenhower presidents. But Neustadt's original thesis -- that presidents are Constitutionally weak, not strong, and that they therefore must leverage their bargaining advantages to the fullest if they want to be effective leaders -- still holds up. (Think the 104th Congress here.) It's hard to skim Neustadt -- he writes the old-fashioned way, in long, graceful sentences and paragraphs that actually hang together. But it's well worth while to settle in and get a sense of what it takes to be president. It's not clear that 2000 is going to be a good year for the American polity...
Don't stop half way through.......1999-04-07
About half of the way through the book, Neustadt seemed to be saying the same things over and over again. I almost stopped reading. However the incredible tidbits of advice in the first half encouraged me to continue. It was certainly worth it. The last 5 or 6 chapters were written over the period between the Kennedy assasination and the end of the Reagan Administration, allowing Neustadt to ammend many of his ideas from the first 8 chapters (originally published in 1960) making the book far more lively. A wonderful read for those with a weak knowledge of the last 50 years. If you know a lot about the Korean War, Bay of Pigs, or Iran-Contra, the book may be a little too much review. Otherwise it is fabulous.
Book Description
This is a story of ever-expanding presidential powers in an age of unwinnable wars. Harry Truman and Korea, Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam, George W. Bush and Iraq: three presidents, three ever broader interpretations of the commander in chief clause of the Constitution, three unwinnable wars, and three presidential secrets. Award-winning presidential biographer and military historian Geoffrey Perret places these men and events in the larger context of the post-World War II world to establish their collective legacy: a presidency so powerful it undermines the checks and balances built into the Constitution, thereby creating a permanent threat to the Constitution itself.
In choosing to fight in Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq, Truman, Johnson, and Bush alike took counsel of their fears, ignored the advice of the professional military and major allies, and were influenced by facts kept from public view. Convinced that an ever-more powerful commander in chief was the key to victory, they misread the moment. Since World War II wars have become tests of stamina rather than strength, and more likely than not they sow the seeds of future wars. Yet recent American presidents have chosen to place their country in the forefront of fighting them. In the course of doing so, however, they gave away the secret of American power—for all its might, the United States can be defeated by chaos and anarchy.
Customer Reviews:
Red Hot Anger Harms Strength of Message.......2007-06-16
I've just about finished a very uneven diatribe against American presidential power called "Commander-in-Chief," by Geoffrey Perret, an historian who wrote a good bio of U. S. Grant about 10 years ago. The basic premise of the new book is that Truman, Johnson, and Bush Two extended presidential power in unconstitutional ways to pursue wrongheaded wars, and they had help from Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and Bush One. JFK, Ford, and Carter get somewhat of a pass, but not JFK's advisors, and certainly not his generals.
Much of Perret's prose is so vitrolic and sarcastic that it takes away from the strength of the arguments he's trying to put forward. His footnoting of his research is also uneven; a claim that a Kuwaiti diplomat's daughter gave perjured testimony to the U.S. Congress about butchered babies in the Iraqi attack on Kuwait, and that this testimony helped persuade Congress to vote for war powers to attack Iraq in Gulf One, is unsupported by any footnotes. The hell of it is that he's basically on the money in his assessments.
I'm too old and fixed in habit to stop reading and listening to historical and political pundits, but I would solemnly advise you not to bother to do so, and just simply vote against any politician (such as Rudi Giuliani) who suggests that going to war is going to solve our problems. As Perret points out, the U.S. must reassess the limits of its power, find alernative energy sources other than in the Mideast, and stop parading around as the toughest guy on the block. Otherwise, the chaos and anarchy created by our unwise actions will ultimately combine to make us defeat ourselves.
Excellent book.......2007-05-29
Perret does a fine job of showing how the war powers of congress have been gradually eroded to the point where the president may take the country to war at whim and not be held accountable. He shows how the trend actually began with Truman and continued with a the series of our "smaller" wars. Overall, a very good analysis. No one else has summed up this material quite as well.
Brillant or Left Wing Propanganda ?.......2007-03-31
If you believe that the result of the Korean,Vietnam and current war in Iraq have permanetly harmed this nation and benfitted China then this book is for you. Perret trace the origins of the cold war and although condems Stalin's brutalty chareterizes the reponse of the Soviet Union and Mao as reasonable.
Perret traces the cold war to Gerald Ford and manages to only praise Kennedy's handing. He calls Nixon a mad man but the sub title doesn't mention him. He barely mentions Carter or Reagen which is suprising considering how even liberal historians give Reagen some credit for ending the cold war.
The last one third of the book descends into an anti Bush diatribe. Any pretension about being an even handed historian from a liberal bent are disgarded and every emotional /charge is made agaisnt GW Bush from calling him an action figure to a draft dodger drug user.He details Bush's alleged evil deeds such as signing statemnts. There appears to be factual errors in this part of the book but to detail them is beyond my responsibilty (much like the writer's I suppose). Perret inadvertedly makes Bush's arguments that the jihadists will follow us back to the US. Isn't it the Republican argument that it is better to fight them in Bagdad than in the streets of New York ?
It is said that those who do not learn the mistakes of the past are doomed to relieve them. However Perret stands this on its end by weaving history to fit his conclusions about the present.
I gave this three stars for the insignt one gets from the first half of the book but the second part should have been written twenty years form now when emotions cool .
Book Description
In his address to the nation on September 20, 2001, President Bush declared war on terrorism and set in motion a detention policy unlike any we have ever seen. Since then, the United States has seized thousands of people from around the globe, setting off a firestorm of controversy. Guantanamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power explores that policy and the intense debates that have followed.
Written by an expert on the subject, one of the lawyers who fought -- and won -- the right for prisoners to have judicial review, this important book will be of immense interest to liberals and conservatives alike. With shocking facts and firsthand accounts, Margulies takes readers deep into the Guantánamo Bay prison, into the interrogation rooms and secret cells where hundreds of men and boys have been designated "enemy combatants." Held without legal process, they have been consigned to live out their days in isolation until the Bush administration sees fit to release them -- if itever does. Margulies warns Americans to be especially concerned by the administration's assertion that the Presidentcan have unlimited and unchecked legal authority.
Tracing the arguments on both sides of the debate, this vitally important book paints a portrait of a country divided, on the brink of ethical collapse, where the loss of personal freedoms is under greater threat than ever before.
Customer Reviews:
A powerful and important book.......2007-08-29
This book deserves a much wider audience. No matter how bad you think things are in Guantanamo, this book makes clear that the reality is ten times worse. Margulies is extremely knowledgeable about the issues, and he's a fine writer. It is hard not to feel ashamed -- and outraged -- by the injustices that are occurring under our flag. Let me add that I do not know (and have never met) the author, Joseph Margulies.
Extremely well-written, intelligent arguments........2007-07-12
One of the few books I've read about any controversial topic that resists the temptation to start name-calling, insult-slinging and obvious political agendas.
Dr. Margulies succeeds in explaining legal arguments in a way that is engaging and not condescending. He addresses every question you could have about torture and then some. He does something many authors fail to do: he argues his point in a greater context than the argument itself. That is to say, anyone can argue torture in the context of laws or the Geneva Convetions. Dr. Margulies goes further and discusses torture in the context of security for civilians and soldiers and foriegn policy, and then also provides the background for the writing of the Geneva Conventions and why we have refrained from torture in the past.
Absolutely enlightening.
Makes You Wonder Why Bush Is Not In Prison.......2007-01-05
Robert McNamara noted (about WWII), "LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he's right. He... and I'd say I... were behaving as war criminals." No question that the only thing that keeps Bush, Rumsfeldt, etc. out of jail is that fact that they are protected by our country's hard to challenge power. If we were a broken power rather than a great power, it seems certain that someone would try to lock them up.
This book confirms that many laws, national and international, regarding torture, detention, and so on have been willfully violated. It is a compelling and disturbing story. And the final chapters are still to be written.
Human right & Guantanamo.......2006-11-02
This is good research book written by a powerful human right lawyer professor who gave a first hand litigation on behalf of the detainees deemed titled as enemy combatants who lost the dignity and qualification of being human.
He argued with precedents that during war time, enemy combatants had their rights and were subject to Geneva Convention protection. In Guantanamo Bay detention center, he documented that detainees were subject to interrogative techniques being abusive, illegal and immoral. He questioned such reign of terror method to get information to protect Americans are doubtful.
He showed that many of the detainees were the unlikely ones at the wrong time at the wrong place being rounded and ended up at Camp Delta. The torture on these 'suspects' may make a sharp contrast to American Constitution of all men are created equal, due process, human rights and rule of laws. Why it happened in the country with such high moral ground? Do we hear the born-again call for turning the other cheek?
This book will answer why the President justify the camp and technique for protecting the American people.
A MUST READ FOR EVERY REAL AMERICAN.......2006-10-11
see through the baloney and propaganda and consider the serious crimes our current regime commits against justice, truth, and humanity.
Every child in America should study this book instead of preparing for Bush's set-up-for-failure NCLB tests which spell the end of public education in America. The educated cannot be so easily fooled.
Then read Elaine Cassell's book on Bush and the end of civil liberties, and the HOnorable Senator Byrd's book on Bush.
Then have a beer with Michael Moore and put up your feet on the coffee table, dear, because it's all over anyway but the domestic spying. Hello, 1984, all over again.
Book Description
A classic and bestselling work by one of our top Constitutional scholars, Presidential War Power garnered the lead review in the New York Times Book Review and raised essential issues that have only become more timely, relevant, and controversial since its initial publication nearly a decade ago.
In this new edition, Louis Fisher updates his arguments throughout, critiques the presidential actions of William Clinton and George W. Bush, and challenges their dangerous expansion of executive power. Spanning the life of the Republic from the Revolutionary Era to the nation's post-9/11 wars, the new edition now covers:
€ New military initiatives including the Use of Force Act, the Iraq Resolution of 2002, George W. Bush's new "preemption doctrine," and his order authorizing military tribunals.
€ President Clinton's overt and covert military actions in Bosnia and against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden.
€ George H. W. Bush's reasons for not pushing on to Baghdad to overthrow Saddham Hussein after DESERT STORM.
€ Numerous Congressional initiatives, including a 1995 effort to amend the War Powers Resolution and a proposed 1998 amendment to use the power of the purse to limit presidential military initiatives.
€ The 1998 CIA "whistle-blowing" statute.
€ New sections on the Vandenberg Resolution of 1948, the "Little Sarah" incident of 1793, and early apparent precedents that did not make the President the "sole organ" of foreign affairs.
€ New material on letters of marque and reprisal, the law of nations, presidential "fame," and the contributions of Joseph Story.
Customer Reviews:
Powerful indictment of the modern abuse of the war power.......2006-01-17
Fisher's book is the strongest demonstration of how far we have allowed the original constitutional design of the war power to be destroyed that I've seen so far. Originally the war power was designed to avoid allowing a single person (i.e. the President) to decide whether we go to war; that was the duty of Congress. Fisher documents this fact and then examines two hundred years of American armed conflicts. Until the early 20th Century, with only minor deviations, it was understood that the President had to get authorization from Congress before entering armed conflicts. Only after WWII did the President claim the sole power to go to war, with Congress simply along for the ride. Fisher is nonpartisan in his criticism, attacking every President from Truman to Bush II, though he is supportive of Eisenhower's limited return to Congressional consultation. Fisher explains how practically every military action taking in this period was unconstitutional.
What I like most about this book is the fact that Fisher, unlike many other critics of this problem, does not seek to push the Supreme Court to intervene and restrain the President. Instead, he places the burden upon Congress. Fisher examines attempts to constrain presidential power, such as the War Powers Act, and illustrates that each has been insufficient and offers proposed changes to improve these checks. An interesting and informative read and we can only hope that someday Congress will again take up its responsibility rather than hide behind the President and then blame him if things go badly.
Congress' Critic.......2001-09-18
Although some background in constitutional law may be helpful, this book is very readable. Fisher is a thorough scholar, but he is also honest in giving vent to his frustration with Congress' cessation of war power in the modern evolution of Executive-Legislative relations.
This book is a great resource for historical and anecdotal information on the constitutional balance of power between the President and the Congress. Well-cited, and with a firm basis in constitutional logic and theory, Fisher develops a clear case that -although it does take on a diatribal flavor at times- does not require academic contortions to be demonstrated.
The criticism of the War Powers Act is very powerful, and needs to be understood more broadly in America. The unconstitutionality of the act is one reason it is never seriously invoked by the President or insisted upon by Congress, yet many people still refer to it as the crux for understanding the war powers balance between the Presidency and the Congress.
An excellent book for anyone interested in Constitutional allocation of power; useful for students, professors, and the concerned citizen.
Congress Good, President Bad.......2001-01-13
Constitutional scholar Louis Fisher has done a magnificent job capturing the history of what he calls "presidential warmaking" -- that is, the tendency of presidents to usurp Congress's Constitutional war-making power. Fisher is not persuaded by claims advanced by modern presidents -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- that the Commander-in-Chief clause grants them broad discretionary war-making powers. His book is a long legal brief in favor of returning the war powers to the Congress.
At times, Fisher's belief in the rightness of his cause borders on the polemic. Though he recognizes that Congress has been complicit in presidential war-making, he reserves his harshest criticism for the presidents themselves. Arguably, however, it takes two to tango; if Congress actually *wanted* the war powers, it could take them "back." But as research shows, it is easier -- and therefore more palatable -- to sit on the sidelines, sniping at the president in case of failure or claiming a share of the credit after success.
No student of American politics or American foreign policy can plausibly claim to discuss the role of the executive branch in military/foreign policy without having digested Fisher's book.
Book Description
In wartime, presidents are always tempted to expand their authority. But in doing so, they often reach beyond their constitutional mandate.
Although the use of military tribunals can be necessary and even effective in times of war, Louis Fisher contends that these courts present a grave danger to open government and the separation of powers. Citing the constitutional provision vesting Congress with the authority to create tribunals, Fisher addresses the threats posed by the dramatic expansion of presidential power in time of war-and the meek efforts of Congress and the judiciary to curb it.
Military Tribunals and Presidential Power is the only book to offer detailed and comprehensive coverage of these extra-legal courts, taking in the sweep of American history from colonial times to today's headlines. Focusing on those periods when the Constitution and civil liberties have been most severely tested by threats to national security, Fisher critiques tribunals called during the presidencies of Washington, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Truman. He also examines other presidential actions that present military justifications to augment political power, such as suspending the writ of habeas corpus, invoking martial law, and using courts-martial to try U.S. citizens.
Fisher also analyzes how the Bush administration relied heavily on precedents set in World War II-notably the Supreme Court's opinion regarding Nazi saboteurs, Ex parte Quirin, a case shown in recent times to have been a rush to judgment. He scrutinizes the much-publicized cases of John Walker Lindh, Yaser Esam Hamdi, Jose Padilla, Zacarias Moussaoui, and the Guantanamo detainees to reveal how the executive branch has gone far beyond the bounds of even Quirin, and he suggests that it is short-sighted to believe that what was only tolerable half a century ago should be accepted as a given today.
Fisher's book cuts to the bone of current controversies and sounds an alarm for maintaining the checks and balances we value as a nation.
Customer Reviews:
important.......2005-10-06
You may have heard of military courts-martial, which in U.S. practice have evolved into something parallel to other U.S. courts, with independent judges and defense counsel, rules of evidence and procedure, military courts of appeal, and rooted in case law and applicable Constitutional law. The tribunals -- "military commissions" -- were different: an extraordinary and special proceeding with none of those guarantees, and, until 9/11, a freak wartime event last seen in WWII (Mr. Fisher's recent and excellent "Nazi Saboteurs on Trial" addresses one such case). Now the Bush Administration has revived the military commissions and this book is a timely (mid-2005) re-telling of the history and practice of these tribunals. I've written and researched on this topic and find Mr. Fisher's book is possibly the best single volume on the subject. His prose is clear to the layperson, he is brilliant in putting the tribunals in context, and is quick to find parallels in the detention (WWII + post-9/11) case law.
(Postscript: the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, June 29, 2006, was directly on point to military commissions and Presidential powers. The book is still very worth reading in light of possible attempts in Congress to address the issue.)
Book Description
Since the early 1960s, scholarly thinking on the power of U.S. presidents has rested on these words: "Presidential power is the power to persuade." Power, in this formulation, is strictly about bargaining and convincing other political actors to do things the president cannot accomplish alone. Power without Persuasion argues otherwise. Focusing on presidents' ability to act unilaterally, William Howell provides the most theoretically substantial and far-reaching reevaluation of presidential power in many years. He argues that presidents regularly set public policies over vocal objections by Congress, interest groups, and the bureaucracy.
Throughout U.S. history, going back to the Louisiana Purchase and the Emancipation Proclamation, presidents have set landmark policies on their own. More recently, Roosevelt interned Japanese Americans during World War II, Kennedy established the Peace Corps, Johnson got affirmative action underway, Reagan greatly expanded the president's powers of regulatory review, and Clinton extended protections to millions of acres of public lands. Since September 11, Bush has created a new cabinet post and constructed a parallel judicial system to try suspected terrorists.
Howell not only presents numerous new empirical findings but goes well beyond the theoretical scope of previous studies. Drawing richly on game theory and the new institutionalism, he examines the political conditions under which presidents can change policy without congressional or judicial consent. Clearly written, Power without Persuasion asserts a compelling new formulation of presidential power, one whose implications will resound.
Customer Reviews:
Good scholarship, but too complicated.......2004-10-06
Howell's book is part of a recent trend towards viewing the president as more than just one player in a larger system. Instead we can better understand the presidency if we realize that the president comes in to the game with institutional advantages over Congress and the courts.
Debunking further Richard Neustadt's bargaining hypothesis (see his book Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents), Howell argues that presidents have the ability in many situations to use direct forms of action, such as executive orders, rather than relying upon persuasion and normal legislative processes.
Howell's argument is a game-theoretic model, which ultimately undermines somewhat the usefulness of his argument. He makes some interesting points, but also leaves the reader wondering whether what he says is true in practice and in history, not just in theory.
Overall, recommended for serious scholars of the presidency only.
Book Description
A new history and evaluation of the "imperial presidency."
Recent presidents have exploited the power of the American presidency more fully than their predecessors—and with greater consequence than the framers of the Constitution anticipated.
This book, in the tradition of Arthur Schlesinger's great work The Imperial Presidency (1973), explores how American presidents—especially those of the past three decades—have increased the power of the presidency at the expense of democracy. Matthew Crenson and Benjamin Ginsberg provide a fascinating history of this trend, showing that the expansion of presidential power dates back over one hundred years. Presidential Power also looks beyond the president's actions in the realm of foreign policy to consider other, more hidden, means that presidents have used to institutionalize the power of the executive branch.
Book Description
What road did Americans travel to reach their current global preeminence? Taking the long historical view, Hunt demonstrates that wealth, confidence, and leadership were key elements to America's ascent. In an analytic narrative that illuminates the past rather than indulges in political triumphalism, he provides crucial insights into the country's problematic place in the world today. Hunt charts America's rise to global power from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to a culminating multilayered dominance achieved in the mid-twentieth century. He examines how the United States remade great power relations, fashioned limits for the third world, and shaped our current international economic and cultural order. Hunt concludes by addressing current issues, such as how durable American power really is and what options remain for America's future.
Books:
- Understanding Social Welfare: A Search for Social Justice (7th Edition)
- Understanding the European Union: A Concise Introduction, Third Edition (European Union)
- Understanding the European Union: A Concise Introduction, Third Edition (European Union)
- Watch on the Rhine (Posleen War Series #7)
- Wealth Beyond Reason
- Wish You Well
- 7 Measures of Success: What Remarkable Associations Do That Others Don't
- A Short History of Byzantium
- America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System (with CD-ROM and InfoTrac )
- American Corrections (with InfoTrac )
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- The Adventures of Tintin: The Crab With the Golden Claws / The Shooting Star / The Secret of the Uni
- Real Musgrave's Whimsical World of Pocket Dragons: A Collectors Handbook
- Frank Lloyd Wright and Taliesin
- Killing Rain
- Introduction to the Finite Element Method
- Most Important Person on Earth
- Jewelry & Gems the Buying Guide: How to Buy Diamonds, Pearls, Colored Gemstones, Gold & Jewe
- Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years, 600-1600
- Forget Me Not: Photography and Remembrance
- Fungal Nutrition and Physiology
General
| Constitutional Law
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
The Matador's Cape: America's Reckless Response to Terror
Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy
The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration
Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA
Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower
