[.ca] The Supreme Court: A new edition of the Chief Justice's ... (ISBN 0375409432)

From Amazon.com:
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist sets a simple goal for himself: "This book is designed to convey to the interested, informed layman, as well as lawyers who do not specialize in constitutional law, a better understanding of the role of the Supreme Court in American government." He succeeds fabulously. The Supreme Court, an updated version of a book originally published in 1987, is a succinct and readable account of the Court's past and present. Rehnquist avoids getting bogged down in the minutia of particular cases, even as he deftly covers the details of several extremely important ones, such as Marbury v. Madison and Dred Scott v. Sandford. The most interesting parts of the book explain how the current Court goes about its business. In these fascinating chapters, Rehnquist consistently includes nifty touches, such as how his law clerks decide who gets to work on which cases and the strict seating protocol that is followed when the nine justices--and nobody else--sit in conference to discuss their votes. If there's a knock on the door, it's the most junior justice who must answer. They don't really discuss cases at all during these meetings, but rather state their views. "I do not believe that conference discussion changes many votes," writes the Chief Justice. Oral arguments, on the other hand, are different: "In a significant minority of the cases in which I have heard oral argument, I have left the bench feeling differently about a case than I did when I came to the bench." Rehnquist briefly lays out his own theory of jurisprudence in a short concluding chapter: "Go beyond the language of the Constitution, and the meaning that may be fairly ascribed to the language, and into the consciences of individual judges, is to embark on a journey that is treacherous indeed." Yet The Supreme Court largely skips comment on existing controversies, such as abortion rights, race-based policies, or the outcome of the 2000 presidential election. The book is exactly what Rehnquist promises: An accessible and enlightening introduction to a vital institution. --John J. Miller

Superb Introduction and Balanced Account:
The Supreme Court is a concise and balanced introductory account of the most important supreme court cases beginning with Marbury v. Madison and ending with the decisions of the Warren Court. The cases are presented without legal jargon so that their significance can be understood by the layman. Rehnquist does a superb job of framing each case with the surrounding history, thereby making the work also a succinct introduction to American history and politics. For example, the discussion of the Dred Scott decision is presented within the brewing debate over slavery and events such as the Compromise of 1850. Rehnquist limits his discussion of the cases to the decision at hand. Thus, readers will be disappointed if they expect to find an explication either of the *legal reasoning* underlying the decisions or Rehnquist's own constitutional stance. Nonetheless, this is probably the best introductory account of the major supreme court cases and their significance. There is a glaring lacunae and that is Rehnquist's account of Brown v. Board of Education, the signal decision of the Warren Court. Aside from noting that it overruled Plessy v. Ferguson, Rehnquist is unusally silent on the substance of the case. The lacunae is noticeable since as a law clerk to Justice Robert Jackson, Rehnquist wrote a famous memo arguing that Plessy v. Ferguson was "right and should be reaffirmed".

Excellent book, compelling narrative:
I am surprised that this book did not receive more favorable reviews. Perhaps for a constitutional scholar or supreme court lawyer this book is too basic. Since I am neither, I found it incredibly interesting. Rehnquist is a good writer whose narrative voice is so clear that I found it difficult to put the book down when it was time to go to sleep. As a layperson I never really thought about the very subjective nature of the decisions made by the justices and the role that their politics (and the political context) play in the decision making process. Rehnquist is obviously a very bright fellow. I would recommend this book to all those interested in the machinations of our government at a depth far more profound than can be gained from watching cable TV.

Depends on what you're looking for:
Whether you'll enjoy this book depends on what you're after. If you want an interesting read and a basic introduction to the history of the U.S. Supreme Court, this is the book for you. But if you're like me, and (1) you know that the Chief Justice is also a professor at the University of Arizona teaching a course in Supreme Court history and expect this book to reflect that, (2) you're a lawyer or otherwise have a deep interest in the study of law, and (3) you're somewhat of a history buff, you'll probably be disappointed. While Rehnquist provides some basic historical context for certain cases he discusses, "basic" is the key word. As for the discussion of the cases themselves, don't expect anything you wouldn't find in any commercial outline that any 1st year law student would have. Rehnquist does provide some insight into his personal views on a few issues, but not in depth. This is a good, relatively light read about Supreme Court jurisprudence. It's not a journey into the inner thoughts and feelings of the Chief Justice.

Combination of Personal Reflection & History:
Chief Justice Rehnquist describes what it was like during the "dues paying" stage of his career and in so doing talks about the history of the Supreme Court. He's an intriguing storyteller and this book is a nice balance between the personal and the historical. By the nature of the writing one can pick up a sense of his judicial philosophy, in fact he writes about the work of the court, "the individuals who comprise the Court at any particular time have a great deal to say about the kind of decisions that the Court makes." In terms of judicial philosophy and the role the constitution assigns the third branch of government, one should take from this book an observation about that topic if one takes nothing else: "During the Constitutional Convention in 1787 it was proposed that the Supreme Court be granted a power to 'revise' laws passed by Congress, but the convention rejected this proposal. Justices of the Supreme Court have a great deal of authority, but it is not an authority to weave into the Constitution their own ideas of what is good and what is bad." I recommend this book. It is good reading and it provides historical insight from a personal viewpoint.

A Good Primer on Institution & Jurisprudence of the Supremes:
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has recently revised and expanded his book on the history and operation of the US Supreme Court. The book comes in at around three hundred pages, and is accessible to a general reading audience. Yet, those trained in political science and the law can also benefit from this work, as it provides a nice overview of Supreme Court history and how the justices operate today. In terms of history, the Chief Justice's book provides brief discussion spanning from the Marshall court in the early Nineteenth Century until then end of the Warren court in the latter part of the Twentieth Century. Again, this work remains light in terms of doctrinal analysis, giving the orthodox views of cases as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), and likewise giving standard, summary treatments to landmark cases like Lochner v. New York (1905) and the court's Commerce Clause cases. The Chief Justice does a fine job in framing the historical backdrop and context in which cases like Dred Scott and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) were decided, discussing the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska Act in setting up the former case and the Korean Conflict and labor disputes in the latter. Since the Chief Justice was himself a Supreme Court law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson during the Youngstown case (aka the "Steel Seizure Case"), his discussion of that case serves the twofold purpose of covering a significant decision in separation of powers jurisprudence and describing the work of a clerk. Justice Jackson also figures prominently in the Chief Justice's enjoyable summary of President Theodore Roosevelt's failed "Court Packing" plan, as the book covers the history behind the appointments of many of the justices. Being rather appreciative of Justice Jackson's career and Supreme Court opinions, I longed for a more intimate portrayal of the man by his former law clerk, but I nonetheless realize that this book is too short for that, and likewise too short to go into detail in a great many of the areas that were touched upon. But I did enjoy his short biographical overviews of many of the justices who have served on the high court, including Joseph Story and Stephen J. Field. For the most part, the Chief Justice gives a balanced look at the figures and cases of the court, but he does show his feelings about such cases as Korematsu v. US (1944) (an infamous Japanese internment case), as well as the Warren court's general approach to constitutional rights guarantees for criminal defendants. I found later chapters dealing with the Supreme Court's administrative operations less interesting than the history, and his brief descriptions of more recent and current members of the court something read like a tourist brochure. Understandably and wisely, the Chief Justice likewise declines to discuss the events surrounding his own appointments and confirmations as well as major cases that have come before the Supreme Court during his own time as an Associate Justice and Chief Justice. (For a treatment of more recent cases and development of constitutional jurisprudence I recommend Judge Kenneth W. Starr's "First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life.") This newer edition is now available in paperback and it receives my recommendation.