I was reading a certain article, but unfortunately, I had to put it aside in a DNF (Did Not Finish) state.

Maybe when I become smarter in terms of the law and the content doesn't go over my head, I will pick it up again.

I managed to get about 200 pages into it, so it was a valiant effort on my part.

The article seemed quite complex and full of legal jargon that was a bit too much for me to handle at the moment.

However, I still have the hope that in the future, with more knowledge and understanding, I will be able to fully appreciate and comprehend what it has to offer.

Until then, it will remain in my DNF pile, waiting for the right time to be revisited.

There is a great deal to appreciate in this book.

I thoroughly enjoyed the opening sections that delved into the Constitution and the Constitutional Convention. It provided a fascinating insight into the foundation of the legal system.

The early history of the Supreme Court was equally interesting, highlighting the evolution and significance of this crucial institution.

The cases selected by Irons were not only important but often pivotal, shaping the course of American law.

The background information provided for each case was both helpful and engaging, enhancing the reader's understanding.

Although the legal jargon presented in the cases could be a bit challenging at times, it was still mostly understandable.

However, this book was extremely long and often had a textbook-like quality, which was perhaps to be expected.

Moreover, Irons made no attempt to hide his bias in the selection and presentation of the cases, which may affect the objectivity of the reader's perception.

On a separate note, the Kindle version of this book was truly abysmal. There were numerous misspelled words, periods in the middle of sentences, and capitalization errors. It begs the question of whether anyone bothered to edit this version properly.

Overall, while the book had its strengths, the length, bias, and poor quality of the Kindle version were significant drawbacks.

**Title: A Comprehensive Look at the Supreme Court of the United States through Peter Irons' Work**

Peter Irons' major work on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) offers a detailed exploration of its history. Irons not only takes the reader through key historical aspects but also sheds light on those who shaped the Court or were involved in significant cases.

In the early part of the book, Irons lays the foundation by focusing on the Republic and the creation of its political framework. He details the fights among the Founding Fathers to bring forth a strong constitutional document and the Bill of Rights. The establishment of the Supreme Court followed, and although its early years were slow, key decisions had a profound impact on the country's future.

As the narrative progresses, Irons delves into the era of slavery and the Court's handling of cases like Dred Scott, highlighting its fallibility. He then explores various other themes such as free speech during the lead-up to the Great War, economic decisions related to the New Deal, and controversies like Japanese internment, racial segregation, and abortion.

The book also examines the changing composition of the Court and how it influenced its views. Irons shows how different administrations brought about changes in the Justices, leading to shifts in major issues. The work is unique in that it provides more background and a deeper understanding of the cases and the people involved, rather than just offering generalizations.

Overall, this book is a must-read for those passionate about American constitutional law and politics. It offers a comprehensive and detailed look at the cases that have shaped the nation. While the reading can be dense at times, it is necessary to lay the groundwork for a more in-depth exploration. Kudos to Mr. Irons for this remarkable piece of work that has opened many eyes to the intricacies of American political and constitutional history.

Wonderful encapsulation of the history of the Court. It is by no means complete, but it hits on almost all of the big, recognize-by-name cases. This makes it a valuable resource for those interested in understanding the development of the Court. I won't deny that, like reality, the book has a liberal bias. However, this does not detract from its overall value. The author presents the cases in a clear and engaging manner, making it easy for readers to follow. Nonetheless, it is an engrossing introduction to American jurisprudence. It provides a good overview of the major cases and legal principles that have shaped the American legal system. Whether you are a law student, a legal professional, or simply someone interested in the law, this book is well worth reading.

The Supreme Court serves as a remarkable lens through which we can explore the fantastic story of American history. Irons takes us on an engaging journey, guiding us through the timeline of the major court cases and decisions that have shaped our nation. Alongside this, we also get a glimpse into the political climates that prevailed during different eras of our nation's upbringing. By delving into these aspects, we gain a deeper understanding of why we are the way we are today. The court cases have had a profound impact on various aspects of American society, from civil rights to government power. Through Irons' narrative, we can see how these decisions have influenced the course of history and continue to shape our present. It is truly a fascinating exploration that allows us to appreciate the complexity and significance of American history.

A history in the mode of Howard Zinn? Hardly.

This is a serviceable review, and it could be very valuable for a newcomer to the subject when it covers the first century of Court decisions.

However, my reservations stem from errors. For instance, it refers to Nixon as a former governor of California, when in fact he was a former senator from California. Additionally, it states that 39 men met to hash out the Constitution, when more than 50 actually participated in the Constitutional Convention, but only 39 signed it.

Not to mention some glaring omissions. I am passingly familiar with the most recent ones, which makes me wonder what is missing from other eras that I'm not as familiar with. One example is the discussion of William Rhenquist's career in Arizona, which leaves out some unsavory details. Moreover, the Powell Memo is completely omitted while considering his pre-Court activities.

Three stars for helping me remember the important bits about the Constitution's creations and early Court decisions, but that's being kind.

I read the ebook version of this particular work, and to my great dismay, there were an abundance of errors. These errors encompassed various aspects such as typographical mistakes, incorrect punctuation, and blatant spelling errors. In fact, some parts of the text were so severely affected that they were almost incomprehensible.

I vividly remember wishing that I had taken the time to note down the surname that was spelled in numerous different ways throughout the book. As it stands, I finished reading without even having a clear idea of what that surname was supposed to be, making it impossible for me to conduct a simple Google search to clarify.

I would毫不犹豫地characterize the editing process of this ebook as “reckless” at best, or perhaps even “nonexistent”. It truly felt as if I was perusing a first draft that had not undergone any proper refinement or scrutiny.

However, on a more positive note, aside from the significant detriment to the reading experience caused by these errors, it is evident that the book was well-researched. The author has clearly delved deep into the subject matter. That being said, perhaps the decision to condense such a vast amount of information into a single volume was a tad ambitious. As a result, some cases seemed to drag on and on, while the backstories of the justices and the politics behind their appointments were sometimes given short shrift. This aspect of the book could have been improved upon to provide a more comprehensive and engaging read.

I gave this book a valiant effort, truly I did. I still believe that at some point in the future, I might go back and make a concerted attempt to read the entire book. The primary issue I had with it was that it was marketed as a book about the individuals behind the most influential Supreme Court cases, which sounded absolutely fascinating. There were cases like Plessy, Brown, Roe, Dred Scott, and all the other lesser-known figures who were part of making history, sometimes unwittingly or unwillingly.

However, after reading 100 pages (approximately when I gave up), Irons was still delving into the original composition of the court, analyzing the personalities of each justice and the reasons why they griped about having to be circuit riders. This came after 90 pages of examination on the Constitutional Convention, highlighting the framers' lack of focus on Article 3 (the article that established the Supreme Court).

While I might have been perfectly willing to read a book about the Constitutional Convention, it wasn't what I had anticipated from this particular book. By the time I reached the part I was actually looking forward to, I was so thoroughly bored with what I had already trudged through that it held no allure for me anymore.

As I mentioned earlier, perhaps another time will be more conducive to fully engaging with this book.

If you have a penchant for Howard Zinn's "A People's History," then you are bound to find great delight in this as well.

Zinn's work offered a refreshing and alternative perspective on history, focusing on the experiences and voices of the common people rather than just the elite and powerful.

This new offering follows in a similar vein, delving deep into the untold stories and hidden narratives that have shaped our world.

It presents a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of history, challenging the traditional viewpoints and inviting readers to question and reevaluate what they thought they knew.

With engaging prose and a wealth of research, it takes you on a journey through time, uncovering the struggles, triumphs, and sacrifices of those who have often been overlooked.

So, if you're someone who craves a more inclusive and diverse view of history, this is a must-read that will surely captivate and inspire you.

A People's History of the Supreme Court: The Men and Women Whose Cases and Decisions Have Shaped Our Constitution, written by Peter Irons in 1999, offers a thought-provoking perspective on the role of the Supreme Court in American history.

The pre-Civil-War decisions, like that of Dred Scott, played a significant role in making the Civil War inevitable. By not imposing judicial limits or even honoring political limitations on slavery, these decisions deepened the divide between the North and the South.

Post-Civil-War decisions, on the other hand, often failed to enforce blacks' rights to life and citizenship, effectively undermining the meaning of the Civil War.

The first chief justice, John Jay, believed that "Those who own the country ought to govern it." This sentiment was furthered by judges who favored the interests of the social and financial elite. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 adopted the Constitution in part because it would enhance their personal wealth in various areas, including public securities, land speculation, and slavery. As a result, the Constitution was a victory for slavery, aristocracy, and elitism.

Even the Massachusetts Bay Colony's Body of Liberties in 1641, which stated that "Every person shall enjoy the same justice and law," excluded religious dissenters, women, African slaves, and Indians.

Peter Irons' work raises important questions about the true nature of the Supreme Court and its impact on American society.

There were times when I was so engrossed in this that I thought I might rate it a four. However, overall, I think three is the appropriate score. Howard Zinn’s (controversial? Once-controversial?) People's History of the United States was an excellent read. I believed that this book, written by Peter Irons, a disciple of Zinn, would be a great exploration of a particular area of interest for me. I aim to educate myself on social justice issues, and the Constitution (and Constitutional Law) is especially fascinating to me. This is in no small part because I have to deal with Constitutional issues regularly in my criminal appellate work.

The book appears rather large and intimidating (which sometimes makes it fun to carry around), but it is actually quite accessible and reads faster than one might expect. It begins with the colonies and English Common Law, as well as some of the distinctions that developed on this side of the Atlantic. Of particular interest is the way law and religion were so closely intertwined from the start, and the powerlessness of under-represented classes (particularly women) that was sanctioned by the Protestant interpretation of God’s law. Slavery, with its rationalizations and contradictions, is also addressed at the outset. The same goes for the Native Americans and the atrocities committed (and justified) by the English settlers.

The book then moves on to The Articles of Confederacy and, more specifically, the manner in which the Constitution was written to replace it. From there, it examines some of the important early decisions (notably Marbury v. Madison for constitutional scholars) and quickly progresses to some of the decisions that reflected the country’s march toward civil war (Dred Scott, obviously). Eventually, we reach Roosevelt’s trust-busting and his battles with a court that wanted to limit federal power to regulate labor. Then we move into the mid to late thirties when the Court finally decided to care a little more about Human Rights than Property Rights (even if they had some missteps along the way). Toward the end, we see the Court’s recognition of a right to privacy and the protections that emerged from it (though the book is a bit too old to cover the end of Roe). The last part, which I believe was added to this later edition, covers some of the post-2000s decisions, particularly those that pit the Establishment Clause against the Free Exercise Clause (which has long been an interest of mine) and delves into a flurry of seemingly unrelated cases that a slightly more liberal court decided thereafter (expansion of gay rights, revisiting affirmative action, Bush II’s contested election and his right to detain enemy combatants without trial, etc.).

The book doesn’t spend all of its time delving deeply into the complexity of individual cases. It is largely a political history of the United States and discusses the cases that represent the conflicts within our nation. From there, it moves to the American Gilded Age and the court’s protection of economic interests over individual civil rights.

Any book title that includes ‘A People’s History’ makes no attempt to hide its biases. You can see this when Irons dismisses the decades-long careers of Supreme Court Justices (“After that shaky start, [Nathan Clifford] served for twenty-three years and wrote some four hundred opinions, none of them still remembered. His judicial record was as undistinguished as Buchanan’s in the White House.”), while giving others considerable leniency (“Swayne served for nineteen years, voting consistently to uphold civil rights laws and federal power over the states.” – with no mention of what opinions he did or didn’t write or how worthy of history they are).

I can tell you that, while Irons includes very brief summaries of Justices’ careers and legacies, I’m not walking away from this book with all that information memorized. For example, if I hear the name William Moody, maybe I’ll be able to tell you that he was on the Supreme Court, but I will not remember that he served only three years because he was crippled by rheumatism and that his only significant constitutional opinion was Twining v. New Jersey which denied the right against self-incrimination in criminal trials (to be overturned in 1964). That is to say: I’m still never going to be a great Jeopardy contestant.

There were times while reading that I had to do some self-reflection. I work for the prosecutor’s office. I’m on the side that has historically enforced unjust laws. When I read about the Espionage Act prosecutions during WWI, I like to think that I would quit and look for other employment if it were my job to jail people (for up to twenty years) for expressing opposition to an unpopular war. But would I be (am I) astute enough to recognize the injustice of such laws in the moment? Am I doing anything in 2024 that will put me on the wrong side of history in 2054? (For the record, I don’t think I am – I work with State law, so it’s your typical cases like murder, rape, and assault – I’m not trying to put undocumented children in cages or anything).

Also, this is crazy:

“Byron White, who replaced Justice Charles Whittaker in April 1962, closely resembled John Kennedy in age, ambition, and aggressive pursuit of political goals. Born just ten days after Kennedy in 1917, White attended his home-state University of Colorado and earned both a Phi Beta Kappa key and All-American honors in football as a running back, earning him the nickname “Whizzer,” which he detested. He turned down a Rhodes scholarship to play professional football. After one starring season with the Pittsburgh Steelers, White took his Rhodes year at Oxford; on his return he combined studies at Yale Law School with games for the Detroit Lions. Enlisting in the navy in 1942, he became a PT-boat skipper in the South Pacific and formed a close friendship with another skipper, Jack Kennedy. White completed his Yale studies after the war and clerked for Chief Justice Vinson before returning to Colorado, where he practiced law and Democratic politics until President Kennedy named him as deputy attorney general in 1961.”

I would love to find a book (for the general public, not some textbook) that delves into criminal law the way one can find books that explore Constitutional law. But I understand. Constitutional law is the evolution of different interpretations of an old document by different Justices over time. Criminal law is mostly different from state to state (but really, mostly the same) and its changes are generally the result of specific legislative processes. I guess that’s not as interesting? It’s what I do now, though, and I really like it, and I wouldn’t mind accessible books about the overall shape of it.

The very last paragraph of the epilogue had a significant impact in 2024 – where the author’s fears have been realized (even if it took a little longer than he might have guessed):

“It is impossible, of course, to predict with certainty how the Supreme Court now headed by Chief Justice Roberts will decide cases that raise contentious issues, and whether the justices will uphold or overturn the Roe decision. With the addition of Justice Alito, there are still five of his colleagues who have voted in the past to “reaffirm the central holding” of Roe. But death or retirements before the presidential elections in 2008 might give President Bush the chance to name one or more new justices. That election, in fact, could well make the Court a central focus of the campaigns between the candidates who seek the White House. And other issues that come before the Court might supplant abortion as the litmus test for judicial nominees. Only time will tell, but four things are certain: Who sits in the Oval Office, which party controls the Senate, which justices leave the Court, and who replaces them are all factors that will affect—in one direction or another—the future course of American law.”

Initially, for my Bill of Rights Constitutional Law class, only a few chapters were assigned for reading.

However, I ended up reading the entire book as it was extremely riveting.

The author, Irons, has a remarkable way of humanizing the law.

He does this by sharing with us the captivating stories that lie behind it.

These stories bring the law to life and make it more understandable and relatable.

As I delved deeper into the book, I found myself becoming more and more engrossed in the legal concepts and the historical context in which they were developed.

The book not only enhanced my understanding of the Bill of Rights but also gave me a greater appreciation for the role of law in society.

It was truly a remarkable reading experience that I will not forget.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about constitutional law or simply looking for an engaging and informative read.