Great Cases in Constitutional Law

by Robert P. George (Editor)

Slavery, segregation, abortion, workers' rights, the power of the courts. These issues have been at the heart of the greatest constitutional controversies in American history. And in this concise and thought-provoking volume, some of today's most distinguished legal scholars and commentators explain for a general audience how five landmark Supreme Court cases centered on those controversies shaped the country's destiny and continue to affect us even now. The book is a profound exploration of the Supreme Court's importance to America's social and political life. It is also, as many of the contributors show, an intriguing reflection of what some have seen as an important trend in legal scholarship away from an uncritical belief in the essentially benign nature of judicial power.


Robert George opens with an illuminating survey of the themes that unite and divide the five cases. Other contributors then examine each case in detail through a lively commentary-and-response format. Mark Tushnet and Jeremy Waldron exchange views on Marbury v. Madison , the pivotal 1803 case that established the power of the courts to invalidate legislation. Cass Sunstein and James McPherson discuss Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), the notorious case that confirmed the rights of slaveowners, declared that black people could not be American citizens, and is often seen as a cause of the Civil War. Hadley Arkes and Donald Drakeman explore the legacy of Lochner v. New York (1905), a case that ushered in decades of judicial hostility to social welfare laws. Earl Maltz and Walter Murphy assess Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954), the famous case that ended racial segregation in public schools. Finally, Jean Bethke Elshtain and George Will tackle Roe v. Wade (1973), still a flashpoint a quarter of a century later in the debate over abortion. While some of the contributors show sympathy for strong judicial interventions on social issues, many across the ideological spectrum are sharply critical of judicial activism.


A compelling introduction to the greatest cases in U.S. constitutional law, this is also an enlightening glimpse of the state of the art in American legal scholarship.

Genres: Law, Nonfiction

216 pages, Paperback

First published February 1, 2000

About the author

McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, where he lectures on constitutional interpretation, civil liberties and philosophy of law. He also serves as the director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. George has been called America's "most influential conservative Christian thinker."[2] He is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and the Herbert W. Vaughan senior fellow of the Witherspoon Institute. He is also a Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School.

Reviews

[Laura]

I'm marking this as "read," but I'm not being entirely honest. I reached page 177 of 200, near the beginning of the first of two chapters on Roe v. Wade, and simply couldn't continue, other than a quick glance-over.

Unlike any of the other of the book's paired chapters, in which each chapter took a viewpoint that challenged the other, the two Roe chapters were both decidedly "pro-life" (to use misleading right-wing jargon). Also, within the first couple pages of her chapter, the first author throws around inflammatory terms like "pro-abortion" and "partial birth abortion."

First of all, nobody is pro-abortion. Secondly--"partial birth"? I know the term provides compelling imagery, but it's just inaccurate. Additionally, the author claims that because late-term abortion is an unsavory procedure and is only very rarely medically required, it should be banned altogether; I think it's self-evident why this is a ridiculous (and likely dangerous) stand to take. Complete and utter nonsense: a political screed instead of a reasoned legal argument. In a book that purports to be Very Serious--propaganda should be left out.

These two chapters must have been thrown in because of the editor's political leanings, and they really don't deserve to be included in this otherwise very interesting and informative book.

[Carolina Pardo · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am an undergraduate at Princeton University where I had the amazing opportunity to take Robert George’s class titled “Constitutional Interpretation.” Many of our assigned readings were from this book, and they were well written, insightful, and thought provoking. I know Professor George often gets criticized for his conservative, traditional views, especially those regrading abortion. However, never once does he impose his opinions upon us, and this book reflects that. I myself am a very liberal person, and I still loved his class and this book. However, I dislike the last two chapters on Roe because they do not offer legal arguments so much as sociological ones. Nonetheless, despite your political views, read this book!

[Karen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I heard this man speak at a BYU forum. He is a professor at Princeton University and also one of the biggest advocates of traditional marriage and anti-abortion. He is adament that the constitution is designed to protect the moral stability of our country and he uses his expertise, time, and energy to proclaim this. This book isn't a light read but it is interesting to read about legal cases in our country's history and how they did or didn't follow the constitution. You may not feel like reading something this deep but I would highly recommend checking out his BYU forum in their archives. His talk was amazing.

[Eric W · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very useful -- worth a read if you're interested in the topic.