Customer Reviews

The Complete Idiot's Guide to the U.S. Constitution

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The U.S. Constitution is an amazing document, one that every American should be familiar with, not only because it defines the structure and function of our government and our civil liberties and personal rights, but because it affects us directly and indirectly on an almost daily basis. Anyone reading or watching the news lately can't miss discussions dealing with habeas corpus (Article 1), warantless wiretaps (4th amendment), Presidential signing statements (Article 2), etc.
There have been numerous books written about the Constitution. What I've found, however, is that they tend to fall into 2 extremes: they either are basic introductions, not going much beyond the document itself (e.g., The US Constitution for Everyone); or, they are massive tomes that go into so much detail that the reader can be overwhelmed (e.g., The Heritage Guide to the Constitution).

Either of these is fine, if they suit your need, but with The Complete Idiot's Guide to the U.S. Constitution, Tim Harper has struck a perfect middle ground. He has written a "plain English" discussion of the Constitution that explains the document very well, clarifying the sometimes archaic language, and tracking how its interpretation has evolved through the decades via court rulings and congressional laws. He gives a brief history leading to the clause or amendment when appropriate that adds a richer understanding. He includes the pivotal cases relating to the various amendments without going overboard and bogging down in too many details. And although very thorough, his style of writing is relaxed and informal, so you won't feel like you're studying a textbook.

If you've always wanted to learn about the Constitution, go with this book and you can't go wrong

This is a very well-written, clear and concise book. I love the way the author enlightens the readers about the different concepts presented in the books. Examples of court cases are very informative, they made me understand the constitution better. I purchased this book in preparation for a test and well, I aced it! Kudos to Timothy Harper :)

This is a great textbook for those looking for a basic understanding of the U.S. Constitution. Some people might have qualms about picking up an "idiot's guide" to any subject, but I think this book was truly well done. I prefer it much more than some of the textbooks I had for my college U.S. Government class.

This is a competent book but which gives a false sense that American democracy "continues to work" as Timothy Harper writes, but the sad truth is that America is broken, dysfunctional, corrupt, partisan, gridlocked, and unable to cope with looming threats. This book can help Americans wanting to learn how to cope with an increasingly intrusive government. It has practical advice for dealing with police and courts. It is well-written, clear and concise. It's a good reference, factually correct. Further, the nice hard cover has a second crease, making it durable yet easy to keep open.

But a pernicious flaw with this book is this: people who read it lightly probably won't get how broken American democracy is. They'll think everything is fine. The text hints at serious problems but you have to carefully ferret them out. The book is like a real estate broker dutifully touting a house's updated kitchen and manicured lawns while omitting the fact that it's on an earthquake fault.

I don't think Timothy Harper intended this oversight. He's a clear-thinking and knowledgeable lawyer who fulfilled a pre-assigned task of explaining to ordinary people how to keep their hair out of the law's gears. The result is a compact guide for an out-of-towner -- here's America's legal system, accept it as given, learn these quick rules, stay out of trouble, and get back to more interesting sightseeing. There is practical advice about how to handle encounters with police and courts -- "if the police stop you on the street and you push back physically, or if you are disrespectful verbally, you probably will be arrested." If arrested, keep quiet. It's basic stuff.

It's not a history lesson, but a snapshot of today's Constitution -- not the 1787 document but rather "society's agreement to live under the rule of law" as Harper understands the Constitution. While there are helpful references to previous rulings, the focus is working within the constitutional framework today. Because it's a snapshot, there is little focus on the continuing deterioration of personal liberty and the gradually expanding power of the federal government. It misses how American democracy has decayed substantially. It's like a tour guide of Liberty Park, pointing out trees and ponds, but downplaying the park's dwindling acreage over two hundred years. Before the American Revolution, citizen participation in New England town meetings was vibrant; today, in contrast, participation is practically non-existent. Americans are apathetic, frustrated consumers with little connection to local government, not real citizens (Harper mentions that the Constitution doesn't define citizenship which I see as a serious constitutional defect.) Only half the electorate bothers to do the minimal citizenship task of voting.

Here's one example of how the snapshot approach can gloss over long term deterioration. Harper mentions the eminent domain case of Kelo v. New London (2005), in which private property was seized by city authorities for a competing private use. The Supreme Court nodded (a 5-4 decision.) Harper presents this snapshot as one more issue for future controversy, but doesn't emphasize how this is a serious erosion of our Fifth amendment rights.

The Supreme Court often comes off as the Lone Ranger, protecting rights of criminal defendants. Since half of the text focuses on the Bill of Rights, one amendment at a time, there are plenty of situations in which the Court intervenes to protect the rights of the accused such as the Miranda v. Arizona (1966) decision. But there is little emphasis on the Court's complicity in shifting power away from states to the federal government. In numerous rulings, including creative interpretations of the Commerce Clause, the Court undermined states' regulatory authority. The result is not what the Framers would have intended. In Tocqueville's sense of federalism, the bulk of regulation should be done by state governments because they're in tune with residents' needs; but each state, by itself, is weak militarily, so it's wise to combine states under a national umbrella for protection. So an ideal federal arrangement combines small-state regulatory smarts with the safety of size. What's happened today is that Washington manages much of the economy, but clumsily, and the result is a bloated federal bureaucracy, a labyrinthine tax code, partisanship interfering with foreign policy, gridlock, ineffective state governments, a dangerous concentration of power in the presidency, inability to confront serious looming problems (financial meltdown, global warming, nuclear terrorism), horrendous corruption, and the Supreme Court deserves much blame for creating this mess.

Further, the Supreme Court is highly politicized, and although it serves as a somewhat effective check on the seemingly runaway power of the executive, it acts in some respects like an alternative legislature. Critics suggest the Supreme Court makes law. For example, the "Roe v. Wade" (1974) decision effectively legalized abortion; critics content this was a political issue that should have been decided by Congress, regardless of one's view about this decision. Harper notes that recent controversial cases such as Bush v. Gore and hints at their activist nature but doesn't emphasize that the Court is acting like a lawmaking body. British constitutional scholar Adam Tomkins suggests that the judiciary is ill-suited for the role of reining in the government for several reasons, including the fact that it must wait for relevant court cases to bubble up from lesser courts before it can act. Readers should consider sharper, more critical books.

There are helpful glimpses of future hot-button issues such as balancing the budget, gun control, abortion, affirmative action, eminent domain, crime & punishment, presidential power, citizen surveillance, and prosecution of terrorists. That Harper pointed out correctly the unconstitutional nature of presidential signing statements suggests he is aware of severe problems, and that if he had been given a different assignment, perhaps a more critical and accurate warning would have emerged from his word processor.

Overall, a helpful guide but which obscures substantial deterioration in liberty and glosses over serious constitutional problems. It delivers on the basics. It's descriptive, not critical, but given the peculiar challenges facing America today, I find it unintentionally misleading because it may lull unthinking Americans into a false sense that nothing is wrong.

Thomas W. Sulcer
author of "The Second Constitution of the United States"
(free on web -- google title above + sulcer)

Easy way to learn about this important document. Every American should read and understand the US constitution.

I rarely write review of books but I am compelled to write one for this book. What a great book! For anyone interested in the US constitution, this is a must read. Kudos to the author!

Extremely biased analysis of the Constitution. Actual quote from book: "...the framers of the Constitution were not especially enlightened. They were white guys, most of them old and rich, and their Constitution was written for themselves and other old, rich, white guys..."

It was wonderful to make business with this seller, book arrive in the condition pormise and wrap to the best to protect form any damage in the delivery. I'm happy with my purchase.