<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<GoodreadsResponse>
	<Request>
		<authentication>false</authentication>
		    <method><![CDATA[]]></method>
	</Request>
	
<book id="148647">
  <title><![CDATA[A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law (The University Center for Human Values Series)]]></title>
  <isbn><![CDATA[0691004005]]></isbn>
  <isbn13><![CDATA[9780691004006]]></isbn13>
    <image_url>http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1172197566m/148647.jpg</image_url>
    <work>
  <best_book_id type="integer">148647</best_book_id>
  <books_count type="integer">2</books_count>
  <default_description>&lt;p&gt;We are all familiar with the image of the immensely clever judge who discerns the best rule of common law for the case at hand. According to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a judge like this can maneuver through earlier cases to achieve the desired aim--&quot;distinguishing one prior case on his left, straight-arming another one on his right, high-stepping away from another precedent about to tackle him from the rear, until (bravo!) he reaches the goal--good law.&quot; But is this common-law mindset, which is appropriate in its place, suitable also in statutory and constitutional interpretation? In a witty and trenchant essay, Justice Scalia answers this question with a resounding negative.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, Scalia urges that judges resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawgivers meant rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. Eschewing the judicial lawmaking that is the essence of common law, judges should interpret statutes and regulations by focusing on the text itself. Scalia then extends this principle to constitutional law. He proposes that we abandon the notion of an everchanging Constitution and pay attention to the Constitution's original meaning. Although not subscribing to the &quot;strict constructionism&quot; that would prevent applying the Constitution to modern circumstances, Scalia emphatically rejects the idea that judges can properly &quot;smuggle&quot; in new rights or deny old rights by using the Due Process Clause, for instance. In fact, such judicial discretion might lead to the destruction of the Bill of Rights if a majority of the judges ever wished to reach that most undesirable of goals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This essay is followed by four commentaries by Professors Gordon Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary Ann Glendon, and Ronald Dworkin, who engage Justice Scalia's ideas about judicial interpretation from varying standpoints.&lt;/p&gt;</default_description>
  <id type="integer">143459</id>
  <media_type nil="true"></media_type>
  <original_language_id type="integer" nil="true"></original_language_id>
  <original_publication_day type="integer" nil="true"></original_publication_day>
  <original_publication_month type="integer" nil="true"></original_publication_month>
  <original_publication_year type="integer">1997</original_publication_year>
  <original_title>A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law (The University Center for Human Values Series)</original_title>
  <rating_dist>total:90|5:19|4:33|3:31|2:6|1:1|</rating_dist>
  <ratings_count type="integer">90</ratings_count>
  <ratings_sum type="integer">333</ratings_sum>
  <reviews_count type="integer">142</reviews_count>
  <text_reviews_count type="integer">17</text_reviews_count>
</work>

  <average_rating><![CDATA[3.70]]></average_rating>
  <ratings_count><![CDATA[80]]></ratings_count>
  <text_reviews_count><![CDATA[15]]></text_reviews_count>
  <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/148647.A_Matter_of_Interpretation_Federal_Courts_and_the_Law]]></url>
  <authors>
        <author id="86024">
      <name><![CDATA[Antonin Scalia]]></name>
      <role><![CDATA[]]></role>
      <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/86024.Antonin_Scalia]]></url>
      <average_rating><![CDATA[3.74]]></average_rating>
      <ratings_count><![CDATA[164]]></ratings_count>
      <text_reviews_count><![CDATA[35]]></text_reviews_count>
    </author>
      </authors>
    <reviews start="1" end="20" total="142">
    <review id="26237154">
    <user id="784692">
    <name><![CDATA[Chris]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Troy, NY]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/784692-chris]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="assigned" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Tue Jul 01 00:00:00 -0700 2008</read_at>
  <date_added>Thu Jul 03 14:08:25 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu Jul 03 14:08:25 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[It's really a collection of essays: A central tract by Scalia, responses by several interesting and learned professors, a useless introduction by another professor, and a rebuttal by Scalia. <br/><br/>While I find Mr. Scalia's rulings often troubling, the theory that he presents here is well-grounde...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/26237154">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/26237154]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="25165050">
    <user id="366133">
    <name><![CDATA[Rex]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Madison, WI]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/366133-rex]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="non-fiction" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sun Jun 01 00:00:00 -0700 2008</read_at>
  <date_added>Sun Jun 22 20:21:16 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu Jun 26 21:56:41 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[This book helped me understand the controversy surrounding how to appropriately interpret the constitution.  Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia first presents his view on proper interpretation - textualism.  Then five other legal minds weigh in on the pros and cons of a textualist interpretation (...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/25165050">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/25165050]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="7522522">
    <user id="156757">
    <name><![CDATA[Jenny]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Atlanta, GA]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/156757-jenny]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="non-fiction" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Mon Oct 01 00:00:00 -0700 2007</read_at>
  <date_added>Wed Oct 10 06:15:07 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Fri Oct 19 09:36:32 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[The first time I read this book, I was a senior in college, graduation mere weeks away.  I didn't pay attention to Scalia's pompous narrative so much as his message.  I just wanted to finish the damn book, get the paper written, and walk across the stage.  Reading it again, I notice an almost danger...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7522522">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7522522]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="4653181">
    <user id="156677">
    <name><![CDATA[Seth]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Washington, DC]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/156677-seth]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Thu Jul 01 00:00:00 -0700 2004</read_at>
  <date_added>Thu Aug 16 13:04:21 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu Aug 16 13:05:06 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[In truth, the book is less by Scalia than it is a debate among several great minds. Justice Scalia begins the book with a paper on statutory and Constitutional interpretation arguing for the approach he calls 'textualism.' His paper is followed by comments from Gordon S. Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary A...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/4653181">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/4653181]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="2423431">
    <user id="124789">
    <name><![CDATA[Trevor]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[The United States]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/124789-trevor]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Fri Jun 01 00:00:00 -0700 2007</read_at>
  <date_added>Tue Jun 26 18:35:31 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Tue Jun 26 18:39:15 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[I'm not giving this book four stars because I agree with all of what Scalia says, even though I think his methodology is sound.  I am giving it four stars because this book is a clear discussion on methods of interpreting the constitution.  You get to read Scalia's argument about &quot;the best&quot;...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2423431">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2423431]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="72581712">
    <user id="260609">
    <name><![CDATA[Cheng]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Powell, OH]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/260609-cheng]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>2</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Mon Sep 14 00:00:00 -0700 2009</read_at>
  <date_added>Sat Sep 26 14:59:58 -0700 2009</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sat Sep 26 15:00:47 -0700 2009</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[I didn't not agree with Justice Scalia, but I liked how he had commentary with other legal scholars, although I didn't agree with a few of them either.  Still, a quick read and interesting insight into interpretation.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/72581712]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="32037152">
    <user id="1427949">
    <name><![CDATA[Jodi]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[The United States]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1427949-jodi]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Thu Sep 04 16:36:29 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu Sep 04 16:40:32 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[This book confirmed forever my status as a law geek--I got so excited reading this that I stayed up late to finish it. What I found so interesting was not just Scalia's articulation of his principles of statutory interpretation, although it was the first I'd read of anyone setting out some sort of r...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/32037152">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/32037152]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="33493572">
    <user id="124315">
    <name><![CDATA[Vj]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Olney, MD]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/124315-vj-ire]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>5</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="currently-reading" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sun Sep 21 22:14:02 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sun Sep 21 22:22:36 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[NOT WHAT YOU THINK! It is a really good set of essays about why judicial interpretation (as opposed to textual interpretation) is a less stable system for a democracy. There are certain barriers to legislative and executive purview over the people of this country that judicial interpretation breaks ...<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/33493572">more...</a>]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/33493572]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="453063">
    <user id="33309">
    <name><![CDATA[Craig]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Washington, DC]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/33309-craig]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="read-non-fiction" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 -0800 2006</read_at>
  <date_added>Tue Mar 27 13:51:51 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Tue Mar 27 13:53:13 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[Scalia's approach is explicated in an easy to read and accessible form. While I doubt anyone would be pursuaded of his version of textualism just from reading it, it's key to understanding the perspective from whence he comes.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/453063]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="7411634">
    <user id="506296">
    <name><![CDATA[Adrienne]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Arlington, VA]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/506296-adrienne]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[Those interested in theories of statutory and constitutional interpretation]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sat Jan 01 00:00:00 -0800 2005</read_at>
  <date_added>Sun Oct 07 21:38:54 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Mon Oct 08 08:55:13 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[If you read Active Liberty, you should read this book.  It lays out Justice Scalia's theory of statutory and constitutional interpretation together with critiques from other scholars.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7411634]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="7655762">
    <user id="539279">
    <name><![CDATA[Kaitan]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[The United States]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/539279-kaitan]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="law" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sun Oct 01 00:00:00 -0700 2006</read_at>
  <date_added>Fri Oct 12 23:50:36 -0700 2007</date_added>
  <date_updated>Wed Oct 17 00:04:58 -0700 2007</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[This book is a collectioin of essays of which only two are by Justice Scalia.  It brings up a lot of great points and issues when it comes to interpreting the Constitution.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/7655762]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="15144481">
    <user id="615632">
    <name><![CDATA[Janet]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Dallas, TX]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/615632-janet]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sat Mar 01 00:00:00 -0800 2008</read_at>
  <date_added>Mon Feb 11 09:41:43 -0800 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Mon Oct 26 11:51:16 -0700 2009</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[Interesting thoughts, but should def compliment with other constitutional theory writings. I like the way Scalia writes though, not too lofty sounding and very read-able]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/15144481]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="37220033">
    <user id="1435602">
    <name><![CDATA[Curtis]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Denver, CO]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1435602-curtis-bentley]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sat Nov 08 18:59:50 -0800 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sat Nov 08 19:00:25 -0800 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[Very good book on Scalia's philosophy and common law interpretive principles applied to statutes]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/37220033]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="18613953">
    <user id="1023090">
    <name><![CDATA[Larissa]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[The United States]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1023090-larissa]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Fri Feb 01 00:00:00 -0800 2008</read_at>
  <date_added>Tue Mar 25 13:50:30 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Tue Mar 25 13:51:26 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[Good insight into the Scalia's mindset while making influential decisions on the US Supreme Court. ]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/18613953]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="22499253">
    <user id="1171021">
    <name><![CDATA[Shad]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Denver, CO]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1171021-shad]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sun May 18 14:10:41 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sat May 31 14:09:24 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[I am a lawyer and a Scalia fan, but I thought this book was pretty boring.]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/22499253]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="22767954">
    <user id="1140805">
    <name><![CDATA[Nikki]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Ann Arbor, MI]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1140805-nikki-raspa]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>5</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at>Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 -0800 2006</read_at>
  <date_added>Thu May 22 13:48:32 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Thu May 22 13:49:03 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[I heart Scalia!]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/22767954]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="35732118">
    <user id="1636747">
    <name><![CDATA[Chuck]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[La Vergne, TN]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1636747-chuck-switzer]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sun Oct 19 20:14:51 -0700 2008</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sun Oct 19 20:15:05 -0700 2008</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[i'll add later]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/35732118]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="77143028">
    <user id="1044006">
    <name><![CDATA[Ben]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Claremont, CA]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/1044006-ben-casnocha]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>4</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Sun Nov 08 17:03:12 -0800 2009</date_added>
  <date_updated>Sun Nov 08 17:03:12 -0800 2009</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/77143028]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="76683473">
    <user id="2493847">
    <name><![CDATA[Michaiah]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Dallas, GA]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/2493847-michaiah]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
        <shelf name="non-fiction" />
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Wed Nov 04 06:52:18 -0800 2009</date_added>
  <date_updated>Wed Nov 04 06:52:18 -0800 2009</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/76683473]]></url>
</review>
    <review id="75841140">
    <user id="2881331">
    <name><![CDATA[Scott]]></name>
    <location><![CDATA[Hoboken, NJ]]></location>        
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/2881331-scott-chludzinski]]></url>
  </user>
      <rating>3</rating>
  <votes>0</votes>
  <sell_flag>false</sell_flag>
  <spoiler_flag>false</spoiler_flag>
  <shelves>
      </shelves>
  <recommended_for><![CDATA[]]></recommended_for>
  <recommended_by><![CDATA[]]></recommended_by>
  <read_at></read_at>
  <date_added>Mon Oct 26 18:59:27 -0700 2009</date_added>
  <date_updated>Mon Oct 26 18:59:33 -0700 2009</date_updated>
  <read_count></read_count>
    <body><![CDATA[]]></body>
    <url><![CDATA[http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/75841140]]></url>
</review>
    </reviews>
  <popular_shelves>
        <shelf name="to-read" />
        <shelf name="currently-reading" />
        <shelf name="law" />
        <shelf name="nonfiction" />
        <shelf name="non-fiction" />
        <shelf name="political" />
        <shelf name="politics" />
        <shelf name="law-constitution" />
        <shelf name="assigned" />
        <shelf name="wooster" />
      </popular_shelves>
  <book_links>
    <book_link id="8">
  <name><![CDATA[WorldCat]]></name>
  <link>http://www.goodreads.com/book_link/follow/8?book_id=148647</link>
</book_link>
  </book_links>
</book>
</GoodreadsResponse>