The Supreme Court has a rich and complex history, filled with major themes, leading figures, and significant changes in legal theory.

This account provides a great overview of these aspects, exploring how the Constitution has been re-interpreted over the years.

It's fascinating to see how concepts like racism, sexism, and capitalism have left their marks on our legal history.

The leading figures in the Supreme Court have played crucial roles in shaping these interpretations and influencing the course of the nation's legal development.

By examining the changes in theory, we can gain a better understanding of how the law has evolved and adapted to the changing social, political, and economic landscapes.

This review offers valuable insights into the inner workings of the Supreme Court and its impact on our society as a whole.

If you firmly believe that the U.S. Constitution was bestowed in an unchangeable form by infallible founding fathers, or that it has been uniformly interpreted to safeguard the rights of ordinary Americans over those with economic might, then Peter Irons has a rude awakening in store for you.

His account is one that focuses on people, not abstract paradigms. These are real individuals with their own foibles, failings, and political biases. And yes, there are also a few who possess extraordinary courage and foresight.

Irons offers a brutally honest perspective on the "jarring and discordant" process that gave birth to - and continues to mold - our Constitution. He delves into the nitty-gritty details, uncovering the hidden stories and the often messy negotiations that took place. By doing so, he challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to look at the Constitution in a new light.

His work serves as a reminder that the Constitution is not a static document but a living, breathing entity that has evolved over time. It is a product of human hands and minds, subject to the same flaws and imperfections as its creators.

This is a very engaging book indeed.

It becomes even more interesting when one makes parallels between the people and cases it presents and our contemporary society.

For instance, I read about how Jehovah’s Witnesses didn't participate in the Pledge of Allegiance in the 30s, right before Colin Kaepernick initiated his anthem protests.

This allowed me to effectively counter the "Un-American!" cries of my conservative family members.

However, for a book that takes on the "People’s History" mantle, it devotes too much time to power struggles between two corporations.

Also, it perhaps shouldn't be providing mini-bios on every justice, especially if they didn't have a significant influence on the non-elite.

Nevertheless, these flaws begin to fade away once Irons reaches the post-Civil War era.

This is by far the strongest section of the book, aside from the treatment of the Dred Scott case.

Overall, despite its minor drawbacks, the book offers valuable insights and perspectives that make it well worth reading.

Interesting but Flawed

The article presents good content with an extensive coverage of the individuals and causes responsible for the slow evolution of constitutional law. It offers valuable insights into this complex topic. However, it is horribly flawed by numerous spelling errors and formatting issues. There are lots of distracting elements that take away from the overall reading experience. It's truly a pity that such interesting information is marred by these problems. The publishers of this digital edition should indeed be ashamed of this product. All they really need is a decent editor and proofreader to correct these mistakes and make the article more presentable and accessible. With proper editing, this could be a great resource for those interested in the evolution of constitutional law. But as it stands now, it falls short of expectations due to these avoidable errors.