Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine
Save Your Time And Money
| AnyBook4Less.com | Order from a Major Online Bookstore |
|
| Home | Store List | FAQ | Contact Us | | ||
| Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money |
||
 |
Title: First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life by Kenneth W. Starr ISBN: 0446527564 Publisher: Warner Books Pub. Date: October, 2002 Format: Hardcover Volumes: 1 List Price(USD): $26.95 |
Average Customer Rating: 4.2
Rating: 5
Summary: First Amoung Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life
Comment: First Amoung Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life written by Kenneth W. Starr is a book that looks into the Rehnquist Court as he offers the reader an incisive and unpreedented view at paradoxes, power and the people who serve on the highest court in the land.
When reading anything about the law, lawyers tend to loss readers because they are lawyers and can't speak in simpler terms and understandable English... they used too much lawyerese. This book was refeshing in that it is highly readable and understandable making for a enjoyable read.
This book is divided into three parts and each part has chapters, all organized to get the reader up to speed. Starr begins this book with a thirty year evolutionary history of the Supreme Court with the Supreme Court then and now and then a chaapter on the Justices. We see that the Court decisions are fairly consistant... which I found to be surprising since the Warren Court and Burger Court were quite different in make-up.
The Rehnquist Court is different still... all stemming from the human side of the court as it shaped our laws.
Part two of the book looks at freedom of speach, the first amendment and politics, religion in the public square, parochial v. private schools, abortion, affirmaive action, gerrymandering, the exclusion of evidence from criminal trials, and Miranda. Granted there is a lot to cover here, but Starr makes the reading cogent and lucid so you can understand the complecxity and why things happen the way they do. Ever aware that his audience here are not lawyers, he gives us a compelling and supremely readable book.
Part three is about the powers and structure of American Government. Here we find out about the statutory conversation between Court and Congress, the Rehnquist Court and the Federal Republic, Presidents: the Court and the Executive Branch and of course, Bush v. Gore. Here again, Starr makes this enjoyable to read as he explains in a very readable terms as he sheds light on one of the most frequently misunderstood legal pillar of American life... as the Supreme Court goes, so goes much of our nation's culture, society and politics.
I found this book, first to be highly readable and understandable, next perseptive and brimming with insight. If you are looking for a book on recent history, (thirty years), about the Supreme Court this is your book.
Rating: 3
Summary: A Good "Law 101" Textbook.
Comment: If all you want is a rehash of major Supreme Court cases, then this book deserves a 5. I bought it because I wanted to learn more about Mr. Starr, who is one of the most unfairly maligned figures in American history. In that regard, this book fails.
While I did learn some law that I didn't previously know, what I wanted was some opinion by an author who should be nominated to the High Court. While the theme of the book is consistent with its title (that the USSCt is first among the equal branches), I have no idea if Judge Starr approves of it. (Of course, that might make his nomination more difficult.)
All in all, it's a rather bland read. It lacks the pizazz of, say, Robert Bork's "The Tempting of America," or Randall Kennedy's "Race Crime and the Law," or anything Dershowitz. While blandness makes for an awesome Supreme Court justice, it makes for a rather boring book. If Judge Starr ever wants to open up, and give his feelings on the Clinton fiasco, I'll be the first on line to buy it.
Rating: 3
Summary: Starr offers valuable insight on an institution he reveres
Comment: Early in FIRST AMONG EQUALS Ken Starr describes President John Adams as a "virtuous, principled man, lacking in political skills." This characterization could easily be applied to the author himself. Starr, the independent counsel whose investigation in 1998 of the Clinton-Lewinsky mess led to the passage of two articles of impeachment in the House of Representatives, was famously demonized in a public relations war waged by his political enemies who sought to discredit him and his work as independent counsel. Four years later, Starr returns to the public arena as the author of a book about the Supreme Court, an institution he worked for as a clerk and appeared before in private practice and as Solicitor General under the first President Bush. The book opens a window through which Court observers --- casual and professional alike --- will gain insight into the Court's history, workings, and personalities.
In examining the Court over the last thirty years, Starr reviews the tools and methods the Court uses to decide polarizing cases involving abortion, criminal procedure, free speech, affirmative action and others. Starr, a political conservative, prefers decision-making processes that adhere to precedent, are firmly rooted in statutory or Constitutional text, and aspire to the unifying principles of equality and neutrality. In the 1960s, under Chief Justice Earl Warren, the Supreme Court was prone to --- in Starr's view --- the worst sort of activist decision making. The Warren Court acted not as judges but as liberal political reformers who, with "missionary zeal," sought to reshape society through a series of radical, constitutionally unsound decisions.
Although FIRST AMONG EQUALS includes no formal analysis of the Warren Court, Starr frequently references Warren for his lasting impact, especially with regard to privacy issues. For example, the right to abortion found in Roe v. Wade, which was decided after Warren left the Court, would likely not have happened were it not for expansive privacy rights first announced by the Warren Court.
Warren Burger sat as Chief Justice from 1969-1986. As a young lawyer, Starr clerked for Burger and he provides unique perspectives on opportunities missed by that Court. Burger, unpopular among his fellow justices, was a poor consensus builder. And Starr, to his credit, does not fail to harshly criticize his former boss for perceived failings. For example, Starr bemoans the fact that Burger was unable to muster the votes required to overturn the famous Miranda decision, which mandated that people in custody be provided with warnings aimed against self-incrimination. Starr almost relegates Burger to an insignificant figure when he indicates that it was Lewis Powell, not Burger, who commanded the most respect on the Burger Court. Powell, Starr claims, was the driving force shaping the issues at the time.
Starr himself served as a judge for five years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. He says he learned that honorable, disinterested judges are the ones who can vote against the people who helped put them on the bench. However, the current Supreme Court justices for whom Starr has the most praise --- Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas --- are the ones who consistently fail this test. Scalia and Thomas usually vote on the same side of most issues, and they almost always vote in a way that accords with the beliefs of their judicial patrons. Thomas is alleged by Starr to be an original thinker, brimming with ideas.
Yet Starr fails to provide examples of his originality. Rather, Starr cites numerous cases where Thomas predictably comes down on the conservative side of a given dispute. By contrast, Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and the once ultraconservative Rehnquist have established credentials as innovative thinkers, capable of voting in ideologically surprising ways. Rehnquist, for example, adheres strictly to the principle of upholding precedent --- his instincts generally tell him to support existing case law for the sake of judicial consistency. To this end, he has a proven record of voting to uphold cases, like Miranda, which run contrary to his core political philosophy.
Starr clearly has personal preferences among members of the current Court, and he is not afraid to make plain his disdain for Justices Souter and Stevens. In a chapter discussing the Bush/ Gore election dispute, he relates an anecdote in which Souter comes across as unprepared and almost foolish, as one of the advocates for then Governor Bush corrects Souter on an obvious fact in the record. Starr has great respect for Justice Breyer's intellect and his ability to build consensus. Justice O'Connor is another favorite, who Starr calls the "most influential and powerful woman in America."
In the end, however, Starr's real favorite is the Court itself. FIRST AMONG EQUALS is his love letter to an institution he reveres. And this authoritative telling of some of its history adds greatly to the rich tapestry of Supreme Court literature.
--- Reviewed by Andrew Musicus
 |
Title: Courting Disaster by Martin Garbus ISBN: 0805069186 Publisher: Times Books Pub. Date: 17 September, 2002 List Price(USD): $25.00 |
 |
Title: Narrowing the Nation's Power: The Supreme Court Sides with the States by John T. Noonan Jr. ISBN: 0520235746 Publisher: University of California Press Pub. Date: 21 August, 2002 List Price(USD): $24.95 |
 |
Title: Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the Bush White House by Bill Sammon ISBN: 0895261499 Publisher: Regnery Publishing Pub. Date: 07 October, 2002 List Price(USD): $27.95 |
 |
Title: Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War of Liberty over Liberalism by Sean Hannity ISBN: 0060514558 Publisher: Regan Books Pub. Date: 20 August, 2002 List Price(USD): $25.95 |
 |
Title: What Kind of Nation: Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and the Epic Struggle to Create a United States by James F. Simon ISBN: 0684848708 Publisher: Simon & Schuster Pub. Date: March, 2002 List Price(USD): $27.50 |
Thank you for visiting www.AnyBook4Less.com and enjoy your savings!
Copyright� 2001-2021 Send your comments
