25 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A facinating look at the Court, August 14, 2000
The book contains edited and slightly commented oral arguments for a number of cases brought before the Supreme Court of the United States since Earl Warren ordered that oral arguments be recorded. Few know that it is possible to attend oral arguments at the court (highly recommended if you ever visit Washington D.C.), and even fewer know the recordings exist. This is a set of six tapes with edited and commented (by Peter Irons) cases, together with a book which transcribes the tapes and includes highlights of the opinions in the case. There is also a brief introduction to the Court in the first tape.
The cases touch on a number of issues, ranging from the highly controversial (Roe v. Wade and abortion rights, Edwards v. Aguillard and teaching of creationism in school, Johnson v. Texas and flag burning) to issues which perhaps aren't so controversial anymore (such as the 'one person, one vote' rule). They are, nonetheless, very interesting to listen to.
I have very few regrets about the book, but they should perhaps be mentioned. First, there is no doubt that there is a somewhat liberal slant to the presentation and comments by Peter Irons in the tapes; I don't find it too problematical since they tend to agree with my own feelings on the subject, but others may find it annoying. Second, I cannot but be somewhat disappointed that these are ->edited<- and not the full arguments. I realize one hour or more per case may be prohibitive and it is perhaps better to have more cases and edited highlights of the arguments, but I would have loved to have access to the full argument nonetheless. At least in some cases, the impression given is certainly not that of the whole argument (in Edwards v. Aguillard, one gets the feeling that the attorney for Aguillard did pretty well, but one need only read Stephen J. Gould's account of the arguments to know that Justice Scalia trounced him and it was only through the intervention of the amicus curiae brief by the Nobel Laureates that the eventual decision was reached). And thirdly, it is very disappointing that the companion book has only highlights of the opinions in the case. The full opinion (together with full dissents and concurrences) would have been a very welcome addition to the set.
Despite these problems (which are the reason I give it a 4 star rating rather than a 5; I wish we had a 4.5 rating), this is a highly recommended set. This is a great and facinating look at the Court and at oral arguments therein, and it is highly recommended. Even if you are only interested in three or four of the cases or issues, you will find it a very worthwhile investment.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Truly fascinating glimpse of our judicial system at work, August 9, 1999
By A Customer
These tapes are fascinating! Regardless of how you feel about the issues involved, to hear the arguements made on both sides, and the questions of the justices as they weigh issues in a forum that is protecting our individual rights and our system of government is truly riveting. They make the Supreme Court come alive. And the editors have done a fine job of appropriate commentary to place each case argued in context, and then to further explain what has happened concerning the issue involved since the case was decided. You will want to share the tapes with everyone you know.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Very Entertaining With A Few Missteps, March 26, 2005
I fully enjoyed this series and own each set. The first series has additional charm because of the nice packaging, which decreased in charm as later sets came out. The plastic display holder and hard cover companion book, including a transcript of each tape, is a nice touch.
The sets does have a liberal slant, though not excessive, which reflects the author. [Justice Marshall gets some play a lot, but then again, his questions often tend to be entertaining.] This doesn't hurt too much, since the commentary is relatively brief, and centers largely on the facts of the case. And, the cases are generally landmark, not leaning one way or the other per se. Anyway, the first tape's "introduction to the Supreme Court" is well done.
I don't find it too troubling that the book doesn't have the whole opinion. The book uses a typical "casebook" approach and prints important excerpts. The book would be much larger if the full opinions were printed. Nor do the excerpt style hurt too much, again it would take much more space to do so. For those interested, Jerry Goldman has a CD-ROM with complete orals of some cases. Or, the Oyez.com website.
I must, however, note that Irons et. al. provided some sloppy editing, which he admitted to some degree later on. He has the "Reagan Administration" involved in a case before Reagan came to office. He has "Justice Marshall" asking a question in a case before he came to the Court. And, some substantive facts and explanations contain some errors. I'm not sure how some of these things were missed in editing.
[I'd add that Edward Lazarus has been particularly critical of this series, including how the comments and editing slants the cases. He has a point, but it is probably exaggerated. Still, with many cases w/i the last twenty years in particular having transcripts, providing full arguments, this is something to keep in mind.]
Nonetheless, overall, it is a very educational series. It further suggests why we should be able to hear these things on C-SPAN. [The US Supreme Court now provides same week audio of oral arguments on its website. See also, the Oyez website.]
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
