Bush v. Gore: The Question of Legitimacy and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
Qty:1
  • List Price: $65.00
  • Save: $6.50 (10%)
Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Gift-wrap available.
Bush v. Gore: The Questio... has been added to your Cart
+ $3.99 shipping
Used: Like New | Details
Sold by Books Squared
Condition: Used: Like New
Comment: Book appears to be new. Book selection as BIG as Texas.
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Bush v. Gore: The Question of Legitimacy Hardcover – May 11, 2002


See all 4 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle
"Please retry"
Hardcover
"Please retry"
$58.50
$4.99 $0.01
Paperback
"Please retry"
$356.98

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Best Books of the Month
Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.

Product Details

  • Hardcover: 256 pages
  • Publisher: Yale University Press (May 11, 2002)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0300093799
  • ISBN-13: 978-0300093797
  • Product Dimensions: 0.8 x 5.8 x 8.5 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
  • Average Customer Review: 2.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,384,771 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

Do the political and legal consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore (2000) relieve societal unease about the way democratic and political systems were altered during the 2000 presidential election? Ackerman (Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale Univ.) here collects a series of extended discussions on this topic by a distinguished array of current and former law professors representing many different ideological stances. The essays were written long enough after the decision to provide a different perspective from books published immediately afterward, such as Richard Posner's Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts and Howard Gillman's The Votes That Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election. The 13 articles almost equally address whether this decision had a solid basis in the "rule of law" or a foundation in legal principles and whether the U.S. Supreme Court should have used the doctrine of "political questions" and allowed either state or congressional institutions to resolve such disputes. Some argue that taking that path would prevent judges from immersing themselves in political thickets and thereby creating dangerous threats to the court's legitimacy with the American public and elected officials. This deft examination of the various legal and political implications of Bush v. Gore will attract readers in academic and law libraries. Steven Puro, St. Louis Univ. Machinery of Death: The Reality of America's Death Penalty Regime.
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Review

[A] deft examination of the various legal and political implications of Bush v. Gore. -- Library Journal

Customer Reviews

2.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
1
4 star
0
3 star
0
2 star
0
1 star
3
See all 4 customer reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful By Benjamin D. Steele on December 31, 2012
Format: Kindle Edition
You may agree or disagree in various ways and to differing degrees with the diverse views presented in this book, but no intelligent well informed reader would give a 1 star review. Each view in this book has to be judged separately. And the judgement of the book as a whole has to be based on a nuanced assessment of these separate judgements. This is a topic too important for mindlessly dismissive 1 star reviews.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
3 of 10 people found the following review helpful By Steven M. Leydorf on December 27, 2004
Format: Hardcover
I got this book to round out my studies of the 2000 election, but got a series of essays that spouted the same old "Good decision/ Bad decision" rhetoric. You will learn NOTHING from this book.

Bruce Ackerman is much better than this. Please look at his earlier works, especially We the People (I and II), and is innovative (though idealistic) in The Stakeholder's Society.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
5 of 16 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on September 17, 2003
Format: Hardcover
Did the above reviewer actually read the book? The example chapter by Charles Fried (and the first paper the book presents) is a vigorous and strong defense of Bush v. Gore. And, I doubt that Fried would consider himself a leftist legal mind.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
12 of 65 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on November 26, 2002
Format: Hardcover
I read this book for a college thesis I researched and wrote. The legal arguments presented are enough to make you either: 1) laugh uncontrollably, 2) roll your eyes repeatedly, 3) thank God that Bush won, and 4) lose some sleep knowing these legal scholars are brain-washing American students. The only Supreme Court that circumvented the law was the FLORIDA Supreme Court. This book points the finger at the wrong group.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again