Caricamento
Informazioni sul libro
Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court
Di Damon Root
Azioni libro
Inizia a leggereDescrizione
Should the Supreme Court defer to the will of the majority and uphold most democratically enacted laws? Or does the Constitution empower the Supreme Court to protect a broad range of individual rights from the reach of lawmakers? In this timely and provocative book, Damon Root traces the long war over judicial activism and judicial restraint from its beginnings in the bloody age of slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction to its central role in today's blockbuster legal battles over gay rights, gun control, and health care reform.
It's a conflict that cuts across the political spectrum in surprising ways and makes for some unusual bedfellows. Judicial deference is not only a touchstone of the Progressive left, for example, it is also a philosophy adopted by many members of the modern right. Today's growing camp of libertarians, however, has no patience with judicial restraint and little use for majority rule. They want the courts and judges to police the other branches of government, and expect Justices to strike down any state or federal law that infringes on their bold constitutional agenda of personal and economic freedom.
Overruled is the story of two competing visions, each one with its own take on what role the government and the courts should play in our society, a fundamental debate that goes to the very heart of our constitutional system.
Azioni libro
Inizia a leggereInformazioni sul libro
Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court
Di Damon Root
Descrizione
Should the Supreme Court defer to the will of the majority and uphold most democratically enacted laws? Or does the Constitution empower the Supreme Court to protect a broad range of individual rights from the reach of lawmakers? In this timely and provocative book, Damon Root traces the long war over judicial activism and judicial restraint from its beginnings in the bloody age of slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction to its central role in today's blockbuster legal battles over gay rights, gun control, and health care reform.
It's a conflict that cuts across the political spectrum in surprising ways and makes for some unusual bedfellows. Judicial deference is not only a touchstone of the Progressive left, for example, it is also a philosophy adopted by many members of the modern right. Today's growing camp of libertarians, however, has no patience with judicial restraint and little use for majority rule. They want the courts and judges to police the other branches of government, and expect Justices to strike down any state or federal law that infringes on their bold constitutional agenda of personal and economic freedom.
Overruled is the story of two competing visions, each one with its own take on what role the government and the courts should play in our society, a fundamental debate that goes to the very heart of our constitutional system.
Informazioni sull'autore
DR![]()
Recensioni
Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court," by Damon Root, was written so that the concepts of judicial activism and judicial restraint would be clear and understandable to anyone reading who didn't have a law degree. That being said, I still found myself re-reading several passages to make sure I fully understood what point Root was trying to make. The book also provides background on major U.S. legal figures, as well as their personal philosophies and contribution to the court. It was a good, if deep, read. I'd recommend it to anyone interested in the U.S. legal system, as well as anyone interested in seeing how some of the important decisions made by the Supreme Court came to be.
Rating: 3For some reason, I thought "Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court" was going to be about the political battles over nominees to the Supreme Court. I was wrong. This very readable book discussed the difference between the concepts of judicial restraint and judicial activism. I had always considered that the difference was in who's ox was being gored; i.e., it's judicial activism if a court decision goes against my interests. Wrong again.I was taught in my high school US Government classes that the Constitution was set up to protect "We the People" against mob rule. In today's world that essentially means "governing by polls" And that the Supreme Court's job was to make sure that laws were constitutional. Turns out my teachers, and me by extension, were wrong once more.The author, Damon Root, tells us that judicial restraint = judicial deference = bending over backwards to ensure that laws passed by Congress are upheld, regardless of any violation of individual rights. Further, judicial activism - usually decried as a liberal plot - these days is actually the darling of libertarianism, and finds that the Constitution says individual rights should trump deference to Congress.All of this cut against the grain of what I'd been taught that I had to read it twice to make sure I understood the basic concepts. Another reading is probably due. I found Mr. Root's book to be interesting, well-researched, well-written, and I will find a way to read more of his works. His political beliefs are probably somewhat to the right of mine, but I always enjoy hearing the other side's arguments, especially when they are laid out as well as this one was. i recommend it to anyone with more than a passing interest in how our government works.
Rating: 4I found "Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court," by Damon Root to be written in a way that made the history and ideas clear to non-lawyers such as me. I gained a better understanding of judicial restraint and judicial activism. I learned about major legal figures such as Eric Field that I'd never heard of, and more about major legal figures such as Oliver Wendell Homes about whom I'd mostly known the name and a few sparse details. So, this book is a welcome addition to my library. All of the above said, this is not a book about which non-lawyers will remember much more than some of the general ideas it presents unless he/she reads it a second time and studies it carefully..
Rating: 4This excellent book details the conflict between those who favor judicial restraint and those who favor judicial activism. Mr. Root provides historical background, dating the judicial activism group to Justice Eric Field, and the judicial restraint group to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and he explores how the back-and-forth power struggle between the two groups has led to the present legal atmosphere, including debates over gun control, Obamacare, abortion, and gay marriage.One thing that could have been developed more is a skepticism about the degree to which individual members of the Supreme Court can be categorized as either in favor of restraint or in favor of activism. I do think they can be categorized, but softly, not firmly, and it would do well to explore in more detail how this impacts the dynamic of the Court. It may well be its own separate book.Easily one of the top five books I have received through the Early Reviewers program!!
Rating: 5Although Mr. Root gives a history of the “war for control” beginning with the passage of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, much of the book is devoted to relatively recent court activity. Recently, the main contenders trying to get control as described in this book are the libertarians versus the conservatives rather than the liberals versus the conservatives. Mr. Root writes from a libertarian viewpoint. Some of the broad topics discussed, especially toward the end of the book, include eminent domain, guns, and Obamacare. The way the different justices view specific court cases is shown. The book is a discussion of judicial activism versus judicial restraint. This detailed discussion would primarily be of interest to experts knowledgeable about the Supreme Court rather than general readers.
Rating: 3I am suspicious of anyone who claims they can determine “original intent” of the US Constitution. It is difficult to know what the framers would think of our modern society and they would or would not adjust what was written more than 200 years ago. In that same vein, I am equally suspicious of the libertarian model of nullifying laws and overturning stare decisis that have served society (relatively) well. While the author provides an interesting history of some of the most famous/infamous court decisions and the battle between majoritarian rule and an Ayn Rand-type laissez-faire capitalism. However, if you are a fan of Reason magazine and largely to the right-of-center in your political thinking, you might enjoy this treatise. While the author provides a concise history of the continued conflict within the court, I believe him wrong in a number of his interpretations. From a writing standpoint, the author relied too heavily on direct and lengthy quotes from Supreme Court decisions that could have been better summarized. I also found annoying his use of the opening of court announcement on that day’s hearing (we get it, the chief justice announces the will be argued).
Rating: 3I’ve been reading Damon Root’s work for Reason over the past several years so I was extremely pleased to receive this book as part of the Early Reviewers program. And Root’s book is much like his columns in that they’re both easy to read and highly informative in this case taking us back to the founding and running us all the way to the present from the basic underpinnings of the libertarian legal movement to the movement’s current successes and failures. There’s not a weak portion of the book and likely just because I’ve followed so much of his writing on the more recent cases but I felt the sections on the fourteenth amendment, Slaughterhouse, and Lochner were the strongest. All in all this is a great work, easy to read but clearly well-researched and a strong recommend to all lovers of liberty and to those wanting to learn about the libertarian legal movement.
Rating: 5