Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

America's Constitution: A Biography

4.17 of 5 stars 4.17 · rating details · 314 ratings · 55 reviews

In America’s Constitution, one of this era’s most accomplished constitutional law scholars, Akhil Reed Amar, gives the first comprehensive account of one of the world’s great political texts. Incisive, entertaining, and occasionally controversial, this “biography” of America’s framing document explains not only what the Constitution says but also why the Constitution says...more In America’s Constitution, one of this era’s most accomplished constitutional law scholars, Akhil Reed Amar, gives the first comprehensive account of one of the world’s great political texts. Incisive, entertaining, and occasionally controversial, this “biography” of America’s framing document explains not only what the Constitution says but also why the Constitution says it.

We all know this much: the Constitution is neither immutable nor perfect. Amar shows us how the story of this one relatively compact document reflects the story of America more generally. (For example, much of the Constitution, including the glorious-sounding “We the People,” was lifted from existing American legal texts, including early state constitutions.) In short, the Constitution was as much a product of its environment as it was a product of its individual creators’ inspired genius.

Despite the Constitution’s flaws, its role in guiding our republic has been nothing short of amazing. Skillfully placing the document in the context of late-eighteenth-century American politics, America’s Constitution explains, for instance, whether there is anything in the Constitution that is unamendable; the reason America adopted an electoral college; why a president must be at least thirty-five years old; and why–for now, at least–only those citizens who were born under the American flag can become president.

From his unique perspective, Amar also gives us unconventional wisdom about the Constitution and its significance throughout the nation’s history. For one thing, we see that the Constitution has been far more democratic than is conventionally understood. Even though the document was drafted by white landholders, a remarkably large number of citizens (by the standards of 1787) were allowed to vote up or down on it, and the document’s later amendments eventually extended the vote to virtually all Americans.

We also learn that the Founders’ Constitution was far more slavocratic than many would acknowledge: the “three fifths” clause gave the South extra political clout for every slave it owned or acquired. As a result, slaveholding Virginians held the presidency all but four of the Republic’s first thirty-six years, and proslavery forces eventually came to dominate much of the federal government prior to Lincoln’s election.

Ambitious, even-handed, eminently accessible, and often surprising, America’s Constitution is an indispensable work, bound to become a standard reference for any student of history and all citizens of the United States.(less)

Hardcover, 657 pages

Published September 13th 2005 by Random House Publishing Group

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 896)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Feb 15, 2012 Eric_W rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: supreme-court, legal

The historian HW Brands, in an article in The Atlantic, “Founder’s Chic” (September, 2003), has suggested that the reverence Americans, especially politicians, display toward the Constitution, is ill-placed. (We’re certainly seeing an over-abundance of Constitution worship on the part of the Republican candidates in 2011-2012 as I write this.) He argues the Founders, who barely agreed on anything and filled the final document with compromise after compromise, as revolutionaries, would be quite s...more The historian HW Brands, in an article in The Atlantic, “Founder’s Chic” (September, 2003), has suggested that the reverence Americans, especially politicians, display toward the Constitution, is ill-placed. (We’re certainly seeing an over-abundance of Constitution worship on the part of the Republican candidates in 2011-2012 as I write this.) He argues the Founders, who barely agreed on anything and filled the final document with compromise after compromise, as revolutionaries, would be quite sympathetic with supporting an evolutionary document.

Amar’s book goes a long way toward developing a thorough understand of the background and historicity of the document which everyone claims to understand but few do; a document that supports both dual (states and federal government share power equally) and cooperative federalism (some powers are reserved to the states but they remain subservient to the federal powers) simultaneously.

We came perilously close to not having a constitution, and I am sure were it to be proposed in today’s climate, with today’s puny Washington minds, it would never be ratified. (Notice that even Michele Bachmann shut up about the Constitution after her little seminar with Scalia - he was probably speaking way over her head.)

It is to the credit of the anti-Federalists, many of whom vigorously attacked the unauthorized work done by the Constitutional Convention (they were supposed to just rewrite the Articles of Confederation) that in the end they approved the Constitution, which in some states did not receive the required two-thirds vote majority, and went on to serve nobly in the new government, e.g., James Monroe.

Some have argued the Constitution was a failure. It lasted only some seventy years and that only because of numerous compromises regarding slavery that became mere band-aids over a festering wound, an issue the original framers had decided to push off for later generations. It wasn’t until the Civil War and especially the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment with its application of rights to the states (albeit later gutted by the selective incorporation dictated by the Slaughterhouse cases in 1873 which mandated selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights)* that one could argue we achieved full freedoms.

The fact remains that much of the Constitution is obscure and leaves wide latitude for interpretation. Sometimes using the words “persons”, sometimes the more populist sounding “people,” the ninth and tenth amendments have provided grist for many in the mill of public opinion. They would appear to “reserve” rights to the people and the states and imply that “nothing in the Bill of Rights should be read as conferring additional government power. . .[but] the Ninth Amendment warned readers not to draw certain types of negative inferences about constitutional rights. . . a text that explicitly expressed certain rights was not to be read to negate other constitutional rights derivable [or implied, a concept that has caused all sorts of controversy] from the document’s general structure.” (pg 327) For example, the Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel could not be interpreted to negate a person’s right to represent himself.

It’s ironic that the Federalists generally opposed a “bill of rights” because they feared that such explicit enumeration of rights would weaken generally more expansive protections of the original constitution and unintentionally reduce implicit rights. The Nionth amendment was the compromise that resulted.

I could go on and on as is my usual wont. Amar’s structure for the book is unusual but quite readable, integrating concepts broadly yet chronologically. Chapter headings, “Making Amends” which discusses the first ten amendments, and “The New Birth of Freedom” which reviews events and amendments following the Civil War give only a broad hint as to content, but there is an excellent index and over one hundred pages of notes (I actually prefer footnotes, but then I’m a queer duck.)

*Interestingly Clarence Thomas in McDonald v Chicago while concurring with the majority which used the due process clause to apply the 2nd amendment to the states, wanted to use the privileges and immunities clause which would have strengthened, IMHO, the Bill of Rights in its application to the states across the board. I think he was right.(less)

8 likes · like · see review

Dec 31, 2008 Ross rated it 5 of 5 stars

This history of the United State's Constitution takes constitution to be an act rather than a text. It's focus, therefore, is not upon what the Supreme Court has said that the Constitution means, as law course and lawyers typically understand the Constitution, but rather upon the founding and the continuing activity of amending. While the Supreme Court does play a role in this activity (various of the amendments are responses to specific court cases), there is a much larger role in this narrativ...more

like · see review

Nov 30, 2008 Howard Olsen rated it 5 of 5 stars

I read a review of this book, which said it is the best book about the Constitution since the Federalist Papers. Hyperbole? A little, but it's not far off the mark. Actually, reading this book makes you realize how few good books there are about the Constitution. Most are either technical works for the law review crowd on one hand, and large print flag-wavers for the coloring book crowd on the other. Amar writes with clarity. Anyone with a high school education can read this book, and enjoy it....more I read a review of this book, which said it is the best book about the Constitution since the Federalist Papers. Hyperbole? A little, but it's not far off the mark. Actually, reading this book makes you realize how few good books there are about the Constitution. Most are either technical works for the law review crowd on one hand, and large print flag-wavers for the coloring book crowd on the other. Amar writes with clarity. Anyone with a high school education can read this book, and enjoy it. Still, this book has plenty of heft. Amar is not afraid to use the words "John Jay," always the sign of a serious work of constitutional scholarship.

The basic structure of this book is simple. Amar marches through the Constitution from the Preamble, straight through to the 28th Amendment. His basic method is to use every bit of historic context-the articles of confederation, state constitutions, british history, the experience of the revolution, Madison's notes, ratification debates, and, of course, the Federalist Papers-to suss out the meaning and intent of every word in the Constitution. Amar's discussions are deep, but surprisingly accessible. Reading this, one is surprised anew at what is, and what is not, in the Constitution. Contra Planned Parenthood, there is no right to privacy. Contra limited gov't types, there is no line item veto. Also, there is no Federal Reserve, IRS, or judicial review. Much of what we think of as the federal gov't is based on nothing more than statute and case law, any of which can be changed on relatively short notice.

My ONLY real complaint. Amar spends relatively little time on Congress's enumerated powers. I would have traded 15 pages of his recurring discussions on apportionment to read more about the commerce clause, for example. We are about to enter a period of congressional activism the likes of which hasn't been seen since the Gingrich Revolution. Proposals to rewrite securities laws, banking laws, reform health care, and change the weather will strain the federal government's "limited" powers. I would have liked to read a little more about this.

This is a great work of history and constitutional interpretation. Although the Founders can be criticized for some shortcomings, namely those provisions that enhanced the power of the slave owning states, much of the framework they created remains in effect to this day (and the slavocentric sections have been amended into oblivion). Amar makes clear that this is a good thing, despite what latter day critics like Howard Zinn and the Living Constitution crowd might think. There really is no reason not to read this. (less)

3 likes · like · see review

Apr 01, 2010 Gary rated it 4 of 5 stars

Amar tries to provide what he calls a "biography" of the US Constitution, combining scholarship from law, history, and political science. He introduces some controversial ideas, such as his claim that the Philadelphia plan was essentially slavocratic--and became more so over time because of the unintended effects of the 3/5 compromise on the distribution of power in the house, the Senate, and (through the electoral college) the Presidency (and thus the Supreme Court). Amar shows how through the...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 10, 2009 Frank Stein rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book is jam-packed with surprisingly worthwhile information on almost every clause of the constitution.

Its structure follows the constitution itself, from preamble to amendments, and although this might have given it the feeling of a reference book, Amar's interest in the document more than makes up for the lack of narrative.

He plumbs the origins of the electoral system (slavery concerns were at the root of it, as in much else), the unforeseen consequences of the 22nd amendment limiting pr...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 09, 2012 Ron Tenney rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: ongoing-study-and-books-i-return-to

Another great book about the constitution. This approaches the Constitution from the Preamble to the most recent amendments.

This morning, (4/9/12) I finished this book. I found Akhil Amar to be a wonderful author. I would advise a reader to read the post-script first, and then return to the rest of the book. I was especially impressed with the chapter on the Preamble to the Constitution. I never considered that the most (only) lyrical part of the document was so laden with meaning.

As most othe...more Another great book about the constitution. This approaches the Constitution from the Preamble to the most recent amendments.

This morning, (4/9/12) I finished this book. I found Akhil Amar to be a wonderful author. I would advise a reader to read the post-script first, and then return to the rest of the book. I was especially impressed with the chapter on the Preamble to the Constitution. I never considered that the most (only) lyrical part of the document was so laden with meaning.

As most other books confine themselves to the founding era, the summer of 1787 or possibly the ratification process, this book continues the story to modern times. Amar insists that the Constitution does not belong to the founders, but to “We, the people”. I came to the same conclusion.

I feel like I am very sensitive to the role of slavery in the founding. I have read many works on the Civil war. I have a light-hearted but ongoing debate with some friends and family members on the role of slavery in America. But Amar takes my position and amplifies it greatly. I found this insightful, but ultimately biased. It is not that I condone slavery in any way, shape or form. It is that this filter of the slavocracy seems to inform his perspective at every turn. I grant that slavery was a fundamental motivation of many of the founders. But perhaps other factors may have had relatively greater roles in the evolution of America and our Constitution and his emphasis may overlook this.

On Bias…
I did a Youtube search on Akhil Reed Amar and came across recent interviews he has conducted. In them, I found his staunch defense of Obama’s healthcare, fawning adoration of Keith Oberman and denouncement of the Tea Party Movement. After seeing this, I found myself applying new bias to the words written on the page. I guess it is human nature to filter information. I found myself enjoying the book less after watching these interviews. That is about me. It is like saying that Bruce McConkie gives a wonderful and spiritual talk, and I can’t appreciate the message because it is coming from him. So I admit my bias.

I recommend this book. I came away more informed about how we came up with the Constitution, how amendments are made and the vital role of we, the people, in maintaining this document.

rt
(less)

like · see review

Aug 02, 2011 Harper Jean added it · review of another edition

An ambitious blend of legal, historical, and political-science scholarship, this book examines in depth nearly ever aspect of our foundational document and how it got to be that way, including all 27 amendments so far. Law and history geeks will love it. Chapters 1-2 (on the Articles of Confederation, the process of enactment, and the basic structure of American government), 7 (state-federal relations), and 9-10 (the first 15 amendments) should be required reading for all Americans. Among other...more

1 like · like · see review

Sep 28, 2009 Ben marked it as to-read

Referenced in Tribe's Invisible Constitution (p. 52-53): "As a committed "constitutional textualist," Professor Amar rejects the theory that the Constitution can be amended informally, without any change in its official text. His highly original work of Scholarship "America's Constitution: A biography" argues, however, that what constitutes the Constitution's text has been misunderstood by historians and legal scholars alike. By viewing the Constitution in historical context, by attributing glob...more

1 like · like · see review

Nov 13, 2010 B e r n a r d rated it 4 of 5 stars

-The Constitution was in fact democratic, pace Rush Limbaugh, who claims the founding fathers meant to create a Republic not a democracy.
-There was a step back in regard to slavery when the Constitution is compared to state constitutions or English law
-The major divide between the states was not between small and big states, as often taught in school, but between slave and non-slave states.

According to the author, this is the only book on the Constitution in its entirety; others usually focus on...more

like · see review

Mar 06, 2009 Jessica rated it 4 of 5 stars

Akhil Reed Amar united law, history and political science in his comprehensive account of the U.S. Constitution. He compares and contrasts the founding of this legal document, our Constitution, to the English government and to the Articles of Confederation preceding it to provide a background of where our ideas of democracy were grounded. Amar starts with the preamble and then every section of each article, and at times, he virtually breaks down the text line by line to explain the reasons why o...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jan 15, 2012 Mark rated it 5 of 5 stars

Absolutely wonderful history of the document everyone talks about but few understand. Amar provides context with lucidity and deep scholarly understanding, describing the whys and wherefores of how our founding legal basis was created, established, and added to. While fairly detailed, this is written in such language that the nonscholar will have no difficulty. I could almost suggest this be taught in high school. It would dispel many of the myths commonly believed by most people, even those who...more

1 like · like · see review

Jan 25, 2013 Martin Cerjan rated it 3 of 5 stars

This has been my subway book since Thanksgiving, so fits and starts. This is a good beginning for those interested in the Constitution--and you should pay attention to all the postscript material about how a lot of other people have different interpretations--and all the footnotes. Very accessible and plenty of food for thought. My hat's off to Amar for trying to do so much--in 500 pages! I especially appreciated the material about slavery. Important. All of the business about geostrategy was in...more

like · see review

May 10, 2013 Eddy Allen rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: arts-and-historical

In America’s Constitution, one of this era’s most accomplished constitutional law scholars, Akhil Reed Amar, gives the first comprehensive account of one of the world’s great political texts. Incisive, entertaining, and occasionally controversial, this “biography” of America’s framing document explains not only what the Constitution says but also why the Constitution says it.

We all know this much: the Constitution is neither immutable nor perfect. Amar shows us how the story of this one relative...more In America’s Constitution, one of this era’s most accomplished constitutional law scholars, Akhil Reed Amar, gives the first comprehensive account of one of the world’s great political texts. Incisive, entertaining, and occasionally controversial, this “biography” of America’s framing document explains not only what the Constitution says but also why the Constitution says it.

We all know this much: the Constitution is neither immutable nor perfect. Amar shows us how the story of this one relatively compact document reflects the story of America more generally. (For example, much of the Constitution, including the glorious-sounding “We the People,” was lifted from existing American legal texts, including early state constitutions.) In short, the Constitution was as much a product of its environment as it was a product of its individual creators’ inspired genius.

Despite the Constitution’s flaws, its role in guiding our republic has been nothing short of amazing. Skillfully placing the document in the context of late-eighteenth-century American politics, America’s Constitution explains, for instance, whether there is anything in the Constitution that is unamendable; the reason America adopted an electoral college; why a president must be at least thirty-five years old; and why–for now, at least–only those citizens who were born under the American flag can become president.

From his unique perspective, Amar also gives us unconventional wisdom about the Constitution and its significance throughout the nation’s history. For one thing, we see that the Constitution has been far more democratic than is conventionally understood. Even though the document was drafted by white landholders, a remarkably large number of citizens (by the standards of 1787) were allowed to vote up or down on it, and the document’s later amendments eventually extended the vote to virtually all Americans.

We also learn that the Founders’ Constitution was far more slavocratic than many would acknowledge: the “three fifths” clause gave the South extra political clout for every slave it owned or acquired. As a result, slaveholding Virginians held the presidency all but four of the Republic’s first thirty-six years, and proslavery forces eventually came to dominate much of the federal government prior to Lincoln’s election.

Ambitious, even-handed, eminently accessible, and often surprising, America’s Constitution is an indispensable work, bound to become a standard reference for any student of history and all citizens of the United States.(less)

like · see review

May 16, 2012 Sylvia Moore rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book is not the easiest read, but it's easier to read than I expected for a book written by a legal scholar. The author is careful to say that his analysis of the Constitution is based on his own interpretations of the historical record, and that other scholars have differing views on the subject. Nevertheless, I found the book to be quite compelling, and I learned a lot about why the Framers made the decisions they did. Of course, they weren't perfect people and they had a lot of disagreem...more

1 like · like · see review

May 04, 2012 Joey rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

America’s Constitution is a thoughtful, impressively detailed, reasonably concise, relatively accessible overview of the Constitution, its historical context, and its applicability. Although Amar intended this book to go beyond “general classroom textbooks about the Constitution . . . pitched at an average ninth grader,” I sense it may be a bit dense for casual readers. But for anyone with strong interest and at least a basic foundation in constitutional law, history, or politics, America’s Cons...more America’s Constitution is a thoughtful, impressively detailed, reasonably concise, relatively accessible overview of the Constitution, its historical context, and its applicability. Although Amar intended this book to go beyond “general classroom textbooks about the Constitution . . . pitched at an average ninth grader,” I sense it may be a bit dense for casual readers. But for anyone with strong interest and at least a basic foundation in constitutional law, history, or politics, America’s Constitution is a trove of fascinating information and insights.

For instance, did you know that, but for Article I, Section 2’s infamous three-fifths clause that awarded slave states additional congressional representation for their human property, John Adams would have won the election of 1800? Had the electoral college been apportioned on the basis of free population, Thomas Jefferson would have finished about four electoral votes behind Adams.
Another fascinating consideration is that the United States actually got lucky with respect to the direction in which grew. The 1820 compromise of course divided the country into North and South at the Mason-Dixon Line, and we tend to conceive it inevitable that the U.S. would grow due west from the original colonies. Southern slavocrats, in fact, attempted to push the country’s growth south into Cuba and the slave-rich Caribbean. This scenario would have led to a much darker American history, as masses of new slaves would have – via the three-fifths clause – massively increased the South’s political clout in Congress. It seems doubtful that abolition could have come about had the U.S. curled south like a backwards comma instead of stretching west.

Amar weaves a couple of central themes through America’s Constitution. In his view, the Constitution is more democratic than some scholars, who emphasize distinctions between democracies and republics and argue for an American republic, give it credit for. Second, Amar sees a constitution that, through amendment and practice, has evolved into a more national, federal document than the one we started with.

Although Amar quite studiously avoids discussing constitutional developments’ implications on contemporary politics, I inferred through my reading that Amar’s underlying themes of democracy and nationalization would cut both ways in today’s political world.

First, a constitution infused at its creation with fairly radical democratic content, and which amendment has only increasingly democratized, seems to militate against some of the opaqueness with which modern politics is undertaken. Pork-barrel pet projects, stuffed surreptitiously into sprawling, voluminous, jargon-laced omnibus legislation, clearly contradict the spirit, if not the letter, of constitutional provisions that provided, for instance, for open courts accessible to “We the People.” Shady machinations among business leaders, between public and private sectors, and among politicians equally violate the Constitution’s spirit. In this way, it seems that libertarians’ modern complaints about large, unresponsive, even secretive government stand on solid constitutional ground.

But the Constitution’s increasingly national character cuts against some of today’s arguments from the right. The Founders unarguably crafted the document at the outset to carefully balance state power against federal, and they conscientiously guarded states’ prerogatives against federal encroachment. Rightist voices, frustrated with perceived government ineptitude and shrinking personal liberties, sometimes point to the Constitution’s original tilt toward the states to justify their position. But, to oversimplify, America’s antebellum era illuminated some of the grave violence states could do to the freedoms the Constitution restrained the federal government from infringing. The Reconstruction Amendments (XIII-XV) aimed to reign in wayward states by increasing federal authority. The Sixteenth Amendment enabled Congress to levy progressive income tax—in effect to redistribute wealth. Amendments extending (or securing) the vote for blacks, women, and youth democratized the process of selecting both state and federal officers; on the federal level, this helped “We the People” circumnavigate corrupt state regimes. Finally, even at its birth, the Constitution’s infamous Commerce Clause arguably provided Congress with broad power to address both economic and noneconomic issues “among the several States,” or, in other words, that spilled across state lines.

If, in fact, the Constitution originally granted Congress broad authority over interstate commerce, and subsequent amendments have nationalized the Constitution, empowering the central government to some extent at the expense of the states, then the more extreme calls for the emasculation of the federal government run contrary to the Constitution’s current spirit, as well as constitutional practice.

I’ve only touched a few issues that America’s Constitution treats. As Amar reminds readers in the postscript, constitutional history and analysis are forums for intense disagreement. Brilliant minds fail to agree on what the Constitution means and how it should apply. My main takeaway, I think, is that applying the Constitution to real-life issues is difficult. I tend to be wary of those who claim this or that presidential administration is acting illegally, contrary to the Constitution. Sure, President Bush may have stretched the document’s provisions. President Obama could arguably be doing the same thing. But any who excoriate modern executives on ambiguous constitutional bases must also levy the same criticism at Abe Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus and (arguably) unconstitutionally acted before the duly elected Congress could convene in the early days of the Civil War. The upshot: it’s complicated. We should approach the Constitution’s meaning and proper application with humility and open minds.
(less)

like · see review

Apr 29, 2008 Conrad rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: owned, history, abandoned

I am apparently in the minority on this one - it has an average rating of 4.2 something at the moment - but I found Amar's approach to the subject a little too fussy. Got 3/4 of the way in and just lost steam. I was dismayed as I got into it that it was written in the form of a 400 page long close reading of the document, line by line, in order. There has to have been a more engaging way of organizing this.

Besides that, Amar is very - VERY - interested in how the issue of slavery (and the need f...more

like · see review

May 17, 2012 Seth rated it 5 of 5 stars

I think Akhil Amar is one of the most interesting thinkers out there. This book nicely and comprehensively walks through the Constitution, providing a descriptive, historic overview of its creation along with Amar's distinct analyses as to the history of its creation and the interpretations of various provisions. One of the few books of its kind that is just as good for lawyers as for laypeople.

1 like · like · see review

Feb 18, 2009 Jack Laschenski rated it 5 of 5 stars

An absolutely fantastic history of how the constitution was written, and how it has been changed thru the years.

Teaser: did you know that the 3/5th rule ensured that the South would control the federal government for the next hundred years, and that the impact of slavery would continue after the civil war??

Amar is a great storyteller and a meticulous historian.

Jack

like · see review

Feb 21, 2012 Greg Fanoe rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction, reference

This was kind of a tough read because it was so incredibly dense but it has so much good information on every section of the Constitution that I was really glad I worked my way through it.

Keep in mind this is not structured as a narrative, it just goes line by line through the Constitution and explains how the line got in there, what it means, and what the reaction was at the time, which makes it read pretty disjointed.

like · see review

Jan 14, 2008 Tim rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is a remarkable book. The author's knowledge, insight, analysis and synthesis are amazing. There's too much to praise about it, so I'll just mention one aspect: Amar makes a very compelling case that from the beginning slavery was a disease spreading infection in our society and political system (aided by the 3/5 clause), increasingly corrupting our character and institutions until a terribly bloody breaking point was reached. The evil was partially righted, then amorality returned, allowin...more

like · see review

Mar 27, 2010 Chris rated it 5 of 5 stars

Very relevant, especially now. I wish some Tea-Partiers and Neo-Cons would sit down and take a long, hard look at this book. Amar breaks down the entire constitution, why what is written is there, and the thoughts of the original framers. Pretty dry, but interesting if you care about politics and law.

like · see review

Sep 25, 2011 Eli added it

The goto book on understanding the Constitution of the United States. Prof Amar has created a very readable history and reference text for the US Constitution. This book is a must for every American's bookshelf. It is clear that every a Yale law professor can talk to every American.

like · see review

Aug 01, 2011 Ian King rated it 3 of 5 stars

The truth is, I put this down because I got bored but I'm sure I will finish it eventually. Lots of great background on the Constitution - the "biography" in the title is right on. The context of why various parts were put in is great.

like · see review

Apr 01, 2013 Gary rated it 5 of 5 stars

A very thorough discussion of the US Constitution from both an historical perspective and a legal one. Some have criticized the book for a liberal bias. I didn't notice, perhaps because I share that same viewpoint.

like · see review

Jun 05, 2009 Will rated it 4 of 5 stars

I think even non-lawyers will like this, even though it gets into some minutia. He's pretty cocky, and I don't agree with all of his kooky theories, but he knows his stuff and this is an interesting twist on constitutional law.

like · see review

Dec 07, 2012 David Eppenstein rated it 4 of 5 stars

Certainly not a book for the casual reader. However, for the student of American government and politics a great read. I especially enjoyed learning about what is really necessary to amend our constitution.

like · see review

Aug 27, 2009 Stephanie rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This is such an amazing book, but it is dense, dense, dense, and it's going to take me FOREVER to finish. I think Akil Amar is brilliant - he's a fantastic speaker who actually comes across just as powerfully on the page.

I get smarter every time I pick up the book (and stronger - it's huge!). I hope to pick it up more often.

like · see review

Jul 23, 2011 Alan added it · review of another edition

A very good book. You don't have to be an expert, but you do have to be interested in the subject. If you are, the book's informative and enjoyable.

like · see review

Mar 13, 2009 Steve Mount rated it 5 of 5 stars

An excellent indispensible resource for anyone looking into the origins of the Constitution. Lengthy, but worth the read.

like · see review

Jan 27, 2009 Derek rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history, political-science, u-s-history, non-fiction

A very dense book, but one very insightful as to the intent behind the construction of the Constitution and its evolution.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 29 30 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (3)

Genres

History

53 users

Law

28 users

Non Fiction

17 users

Politics

16 users

History > American History

10 users

Politics > Government

4 users

Biography

3 users

United States

2 users

Reference

2 users

Politics > Political Science

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Akhil Reed Amar

Akhil Reed Amar is currently Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University, where he teaches constitutional law in both Yale College and Yale Law School. He received his B.A, summa cum laude, in 1980 from Yale College, and his J.D. in 1984 from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of The Yale Law Journal. After clerking for Judge Stephen Breyer, he joined the Yale fac...more Akhil Reed Amar is currently Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University, where he teaches constitutional law in both Yale College and Yale Law School. He received his B.A, summa cum laude, in 1980 from Yale College, and his J.D. in 1984 from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of The Yale Law Journal. After clerking for Judge Stephen Breyer, he joined the Yale faculty in 1985. In 1994 he received the Paul Bator award from the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy, and in 1997 he was awarded an honorary doctorate of law by Suffolk University. In 1995 the National Law Journal named him as one of 40 “Rising Stars in the Law,” and in 1997 The American Lawyer placed him on their “Public Sector 45" list. His work on the Bill of Rights also earned the ABA Certificate of Merit and the Yale University Press Governor’s Award. He has delivered endowed lectures at over two dozen colleges and universities, and has written widely on constitutional issues for such publications as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, The New Republic, and Slate. He is also a contributing editor to The American Lawyer. His many law review articles and books have been widely cited by scholars, judges, and lawmakers; for example, the Justices of the United States Supreme Court have invoked his work in more than twenty cases, and he has testified before Congress on a wide range of constitutional issues. Along with Dean Paul Brest and Professors Sanford Levinson, Jack Balkin, and Reva Siegel, Professor Amar is the co-editor of a leading constitutional law casebook, Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking. He is also the author of several books, including The Constitution and Criminal Procedure: First Principles (Yale Univ. Press, 1997), The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction (Yale Univ. Press, 1998), America’s Constitution: A Biography (Random House 2005), and most recently, America’s Unwritten Constitution: The Precedents and Principles We Live By (Basic Books, 2012).

from http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/amarb...(less)

More about Akhil Reed Amar...

Books by Akhil Reed Amar

The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction

America's Unwritten Constitution: The Precedents and Principles We Live By

For the People: What the Constitution Really Says About Your Rights

The Constitution and Criminal Procedure: First Principles

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About America's Constit...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

title link	preview: America's Constitution: A Biography
avg rating	preview: America's Constitution: A Biography Goodreads rating: 4.17 (314 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/843764.America_s_Constitution?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320490009l/843764.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/843764.America_s_Constitution?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]America's Constitution: A Biography by Akhil Reed Amar[/url]

America's Constitution: A Biography

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website