A brilliant new approach to the Constitution and courts of the United States by Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.For Justice Breyer, the Consti...
read full description
reviews
Dec 27, 2008
Tom
rated it: 
Why is a Supreme Court justice writing a book? Because he's trying to influence public opinion. And it's one more sign that the Supreme Court has become politicized, making essentially legislative decisions (Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board of Education, and so forth). A glaring example of politicization was the Court's Bush v. Gore decision in which the Court essentially declared the winner.
The Framers never intended for nine unelected people to have such sweeping power. They're unaccoun More...
The Framers never intended for nine unelected people to have such sweeping power. They're unaccoun More...
Jul 29, 2011
Joey
rated it: 
Although Active Liberty ably makes the case that literalist methods of statutory and constitutional interpretation suffer from various shortcomings, it fails to convincingly articulate why justices should primarily emphasize the democratic nature of the Constitution in their decisions, potentially at the expense of other important considerations. Justice Breyer could have been more persuasive had he, first, explained why active liberty is a more important judicial polestar than, say, separation-
More...
Apr 27, 2009
Mick
rated it:
The next time I read about a decision by the Supremes that leaves me scratching my head and wondering, "What were they thinking?", I've at least got this little book by Justice Breyer to give me one or two clues. ACTIVE LIBERTY: INTERPRETING OUR DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION is a blueprint explaining the components of judicial activism, and pleads its argument against what Breyer terms Constitutional "textualists."
The foundation of Breyer's premise has to do with the d More...
The foundation of Breyer's premise has to do with the d More...
Jan 03, 2009
Brian
rated it:
Justice Breyer's central point in this book is that the Constitution protects both "modern," or negative, liberty--freedom from government infringement of individual rights--and "ancient," or active, liberty--an individual's right to participate in the democratic process. Breyer argues that both negative and active liberty are essential to the proper functioning of the government, and that courts should decide cases with these dual forms of liberty in mind.
Breyer' More...
Breyer' More...
Dec 17, 2009
Mark
rated it: 
Describes the concepts of the personal rights of active liberty (participation in government) and passive liberty (freedom from government interference), and discusses how judicial decision making can be influenced by taking these rights into account. This book is short and repetitive, but the fundamental importance of these rights in American society outweighs those shortcomings.
0 comments
like
(2 people liked it)
Jul 21, 2011
Withanhauser
rated it:
The US Supreme Court, though ostensibly apolitical, is largely a product of the political—and popular climate—present in the United States at a given time. Justices are appointed by the President who, in trying to move forward his/her—and his/her party’s—agenda, will undoubtedly consider a prospective appointee’s jurisprudence and judicial record for suspected sympathies and beliefs. But, has it always been this way? In his book, The Nine, Jeffrey Toobin suggests that, over the past thirty years
More...
Jan 29, 2010
David
rated it: 
Food for thought for an Originalist like me.
Lucid and thought-provoking, it gives the reader valuable insight into the differences of how "liberals" and "conservatives" process the clauses of the Constitution. In his approach, Breyer for the most part is apolitical, and as a Justice has the repsonsibility to be so. But the explanations of his opinions lurch dramatically into the political realm, especially in privacy and speech issues.
A great read regardless of More...
Lucid and thought-provoking, it gives the reader valuable insight into the differences of how "liberals" and "conservatives" process the clauses of the Constitution. In his approach, Breyer for the most part is apolitical, and as a Justice has the repsonsibility to be so. But the explanations of his opinions lurch dramatically into the political realm, especially in privacy and speech issues.
A great read regardless of More...
Apr 13, 2009
Bethany
rated it: 
I really did read this with an open mind, I swear. I wanted to see how the more liberal 'evolving Constitution' justices explained their jurisprudence. But this was a real snore. Just not well written, no colorful examples, no personality really of any kind. In person Breyer seems pretty fun, but there's no evidence of that in here. Not to mention that his jurisprudence makes no sense to me still - he's trying to encourage democracy by ruling the way he does? Really? By taking abortion an
More...
Jul 16, 2010
Lezlee
rated it:
Breyer is my favorite justice, so I'm slightly biased, but this book is really apolitical. He is only trying to explain the judicial process and the importance of interpretations of the constitution. I think a lot of people truly misunderstand the idea of 'activist judges' or the idea that judges appointed under a republican administration are going to be "conservative" or under a democratic administration are going to be "liberal". It doesn't quite work that way at all.
More...
0 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Apr 06, 2010
Alina
rated it:
At first, this book seems more confusing than helpful -- theoretical vagaries are not very enlightening. However, Supreme Court Justice Breyer really gets going about halfway through, when he starts using extensive examples from previous court decisions, applicable cases reviewed elsewhere, etc. Then, he makes his points and makes them well. In particular, the chapter on Administrative Law (most pertinent to my interests) is excellent in regards to providing clear concrete cases to provide instr
More...
Jan 31, 2010
Kl
rated it:
I didn't really like this book. He talked too much about our "democracy" when he should know that we are a Constitutional Republic. He also talked a lot about the Supreme Court interpreting the Constitution. No where in the Constitution is the SC granted the power to interpret. I was often left wondering if he has even read the document he talks so much about???
As Thomas Jefferson said, "The judiciary if given too much power might ruin our republic, and destroy our rights." More...
As Thomas Jefferson said, "The judiciary if given too much power might ruin our republic, and destroy our rights." More...
Dec 24, 2010
Maggie
rated it:
excellent. it will take a few listens for me to gather together all of the richness presented by breyer but it will be time well spent. and as a 65 year old, absorbing these ideas beats doing crossword puzzles to keep my aging brain agile. his views help me to re-invest in hope that "truth will out". for that alone i am glad to have listened to this audio book. in addition, his ideas provides me with a clarity i was seeking with regards to the supreme court.
Jun 05, 2009
Jason
rated it:
an alternative view of judicial interpretation, in contrast to the strict textualist Scalia view. liked the focus on looking to how a given law/controversy should be interpreted in light of the constitutional purpose of promoting an active democracy on the individual level - in addition to the usual focus on the "negative" liberty of the bill of rights. Breyer thinks we need to look at both types of liberty and makes a persuasive case in favor of his view.
Sep 25, 2011
Justice Breyer is truly a 21st century jurist. This book showcases his brilliance and ability to consider American law from a whole new perspective. Not an easy read, and requires a careful study but well worth the time of anyone interested in American legal development.
Jul 26, 2011
Ronald
rated it:
Disappointing on many levels. Doesn't hold a candle to Judge Bork's many works. I'll summarize "active" liberty for you: We're the judges, we know best, we need more power, and the "negative" liberty of the Founding Fathers is holding us back. Downright scary in some parts.
Sep 25, 2010
Sean
rated it:
SCOTUS Justice Stephen Breyer continues a tradition of essentially Libertarian interpretations of the US Constitution, contributing his analysis of precedent and meaning to the broader body of interpretations about Constitutional Law
Sep 21, 2010
Bryson
rated it:
This was a pretty fascinating little book by Justice Breyer. The idea of active liberty, or the liberty of the ancients, was interesting and definitely something worth considering.
Aug 30, 2010
John
rated it:
An excellent little book by a Justice likely to go down in history as solid, if not superlative. Certainly worth reading if an 'Originalist' found it thought-provoking (see below.
Mar 18, 2009
Mathalus
rated it:
I started this after I read The Nine, but it is extremely hard to get through. I wish I could push through it and pick up some anti-Constructionist tips.
Sep 26, 2009
Cheng
rated it:
Very well written, a fast read, succinct, really gets his point across. And of course, a point of view I agree with!
Mar 03, 2010
Josh
rated it:
The underlying point to this was very interesting, and a different take on the living constitution than I had read before. However, it reads like a very long speech, and is incredibly dry.
Jan 10, 2009
Matt
rated it:
Kind of difficult to follow for somebody with no background in the field.
Oct 18, 2010
Amy
rated it:
I tried, but I could not finish it. I could not follow his arguments. His writing felt muddy. I stopped at page 60 or so.
May 18, 2011
Christopher
rated it:
Justice Breyer does a good job of laying out the case for a living constitution, though I he could have delved a bit deeper into the examples. It is a great intellectual discussion rather than an argument, giving the basic ground rules and simple examples.
The workability of the theory he lays out, though, depends on how well his theory holds up in difficult and intricate cases. That would have made it more convincing and doubtlessly more engrossing.
The workability of the theory he lays out, though, depends on how well his theory holds up in difficult and intricate cases. That would have made it more convincing and doubtlessly more engrossing.
Oct 08, 2007
Adrienne
rated it:
If you read a Matter of Interpretation, you should read this book. This book is a short exposition of Justice Breyer's theory of statutory and constitutional interpretation, and that, quite simply, is what makes it valuable.
