This book is a sweeping indictment of the legal profession in the realm of constitutional interpretation. The adversarial, advocacy-based American legal system is well suited to American justice, in which one-sided arguments collide to produce a just outcome. But when applied to constitutional theorizing, the result is selective analysis, overheated rhetoric, distorted facts, and overstated conclusions. Such wayward theorizing finds its way into print in the nation’s over 600 law journals – professional publications run by law students, not faculty or other professionals – and peer review is almost never used to evaluate worthiness. The consequences of this system are examined through three timely the presidential veto, the “unitary theory” of the president’s commander-in-chief power, and the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms.” In each case, law reviews were the breeding ground for defective theories that won false legitimacy and political currency. This book concludes with recommendations for reform.
Robert J. Spitzer is Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the State University of New York, College at Cortland, where he has taught for nearly forty years. He has also been a visiting professor at Cornell University for almost thirty years. Spitzer is Series Editor for the book series "American Constitutionalism" for SUNY Press, and for the "Presidential Briefing Book" Series for Routledge. He's received the SUNY Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Scholarship, and served as President of the Presidency Research Group, an international association of presidency scholars (affiliated with the American Political Science Association). He has testified before Congress on several occasions, and is often quoted and interviewed by American and international news outlets, and contributes regularly to newspapers and other media outlets. He earned his Ph.D. from Cornell University.