Customer Reviews

May It Please the Court: The Most Significant Oral Arguments Made Before the Supreme Court Since 1955

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

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.

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.

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.]

When I purchased this compilation, I held a wide range of very high hopes. Here I thought I would find numerous High Court appeals characterized by forceful and powerfully persuasive argument, a balanced selection of cases demonstrating the scope of issues addressed by our nation's highest judicial body, and neutral yet informative commentary. Well, one out of three ain't bad.

Irons does a fine job choosing and editing the most intriguing parts of the oral arguments. Leaving in gaffes such as the assistant State Attorney General in the Gideon case seriously (but rather unwisely) suggesting to the Court that any lay person be permitted to represent criminal defendants makes one think deeply about the need for timely and effective responses to questions from the bench. The lack of preparation on the part of Sarah Weddington (attorney for Roe) is so painfully evident during the first iteration of Roe v. Wade, even the listener is embarrassed. The Court's public lambasting of the state's attorney in Brown can only bring to mind visions of Thurgood Marshall grinning with satisfaction.

However, my satisfaction beyond this point was somewhat diminished.

Irons deifies Chief Justice Warren far too many times for my taste (e.g., Warren broke the justice's code of silence by insisting on taping, Warren provided the Court with inimitable guidance in selecting only the cases of the greatest import, Warren's judicial foresight changed the nation, etc.) Also, the tone of the cases (Miranda v. Arizona, United States v. Nixon, Roe v. Wade, etc.) is unambiguously liberal - an irritating characteristic found on all six tapes. Further, Iron's commentary is somewhat strained when attempting, yet ultimately failing, to maintain a balanced perspective.

Overall, this is an interesting and provocative work. If you can look past the editor's bias (also evidenced in his other publication May It Please the Court: The Supreme Court and the First Amendment), it has much to offer and makes for a mesmerizing evening. Recommended but be sure to keep your liberal academic filter on.

This is probably the best item I have purchased all year long, and definitely the most intellectually stimulating. I was expecting a product that would be informative and interesting, but my expectations where surpassed by leaps and bounds.

I am currently working on a case as a Pro Se litigant that I feel may very well wind up before the high court before all is said and done, and so I purchased this item to gain insight on how the justices decide cases, the methods used to argue, how the points are made and

I was surprised at the quality of the recordings. I typically dislike narrated tapes because many narrators are overbearing and feel the need to explain every little event, usually resulting in my mumbling of various expletives at the tape player like "Shut up and let me decide for myself" and "I want to hear the justices, not you describing the paintings on the wall". May It Please the Court was different however, the narrator spoke no more than necessary and was unusually informative when he did speak.

Every citizen who wants to learn how our legal system works should listen to these tapes. I have little doubt that these tapes would prove to be invaluable learning tools in the classrooms in both public high schools and in the collegiate setting.

Whether you are a law student, pro se litigant, seasoned attorney or just an average citizen wanting to know more about how the system works, May It Please the Court is well worth the price and your time.

I bought this book because it sounded interesting, and because I hoped that itwould help me remember the cases that I needed to for class. I am a law student. The cases covered in this book are: Baker v Carr, US v Nixon, Deshaney v Winnebago County, Abington School District v Schempp, Edwards v Aguillard, Wisconsin v Yoder, Cox v Louisiana, Tinker v Des Moines, Communist Party v Subversive Activities Control Board, Texas v Johnson, New York Times v United States, Gideon v Wainwright, Terry v Ohio, Miranda v Arizona, Gregg v Georgia, Cooper v Aaron, Heart of Atlanta Motel v US, Loving v Virginia, Palmer v Thompson, Regents v Bakke, San Antonio v Rodriguez, Roe v Wade, and Bowers v Hardwick. These are all super important cases which are studied in multiple classes. It helps to hear the oral argument to understand the issue and what is at stake in these decisions better. If you are a law student and would like to be able to listen to the cases, understand them and therefore remember them better, this series is the way to go. I highly recommend purchasing this book.

I am not a U.S. Supreme Court enthusiast, but in light of the Courts activity in the 2000 presidential election case (George W. Bush vs. Al Gore), I searched out books on the U.S. Supreme Court and found "May It Please the Court" to be a fascinating read. It sheds light on the ebb and flow of the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings and reasonings over the past 30 years.

Recently millions of Americans were privileged to hear live the two presidential election cases that the U.S. Supreme Court took and vicariously we all had a "fascinating you-are-there experience." In "May It Please the Court" editors Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton spent scores of hours at the National Archives in Washington retrieving and editing twenty-three cases and once again give average Americans the opportunity to experience, in proxy, each court case.

In 1955 the U.S. Supreme Court began tape recording all cases from which twenty-three ground-breaking cases were selected by Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton. These are segmented into five sections: "Secure the Blessings of Liberty," "Congress Shall Make No Law," "In All Criminal Prosecutions," The Equal Protection of the Law" and "A Right of Personal Privacy." Each section has an informative foreword by the Editors.

Skilled advocates on both sides, as in the two presidential election cases, argue each landmark case forcefully, and most often, as in the recent presidential election cases, the Court's opinions have sparked controversy. Our Constitution invested great powers in government officials and these powers are only kept in check by the Bill of Rights. And these Rights only have meaning if government officials can be forced to obey them. Only the courts have the ultimate power of enforcement and thus the Supreme Court of the United States of America has the ultimate power. This excellent book helps all Americans to understand how this Court balances the legitimate powers of government officials and the rights of the people. Highly Recommended.

Everything was delivered on time in great condition, with the audio cassettes too. The book is amazing--so detailed and makes the cases so real. Fantastic price too!

As a member of the US Supreme Court Bar Association I've only had two cases go up for cert and none get accepted for argument. The person I know whose argued the most is a professor of law and even he's only been there twice.

The point is: in one book, you can gain more practical experience with how arguments actually work before the US Supreme Court than people who are actually credentialed in the field.

And for what it is, it's pretty exciting stuff. In this short, accessible volume, editor Peter Irons tackles the big issues that have come before the US Supreme Court since it first started recording oral arguments and up until the book's then date of publication in 1993.

The areas treated are as follows:

"Secure the Blessings of Liberty"

This area covers the cases of Baker v. Carr (supporting the principle of one man/one vote), US v. Nixon (where President Nixon was forced by a unanimous Supreme Court to hand over White House tapes), and Deshaney v. Winnebago County (where the Supreme Court struck down an attempt to make protective services agencies liable if they failed to properly protect their charges).

"Congress Shall Make No Law"

This area covers important first amendment cases relating to relgion, prayer in schools, freedom of speech/freedom of association, flag burning and prior restraint. The religion/prayer cases are Abington School District v. Schempp (prohibiting state sanctioned prayer time in school), Edwards v. Aguillard (striking down a Lousiana law which ordained the teaching of the so called creation science), and Wisconson v. Yoder (which permitted Wisconson Amish to stop their children from attending school after the 8th grade...before that the kids could be home schooled). The freedom of speech/freedom of association cases are Tinker v. Des Moines (where peaceful civil rights protest was upheld) and Communist Party v. Subversive Activities Control Board (where the Supreme Court punted on the constitutionality of a McCarthy type board to supervise the activities of the American Communist Party). The flag burning case was Texas v. Johnson and the prior restraint case was New York Times v. United States.

"In all criminal prosecutions"

This area is perhaps most critical to Americans because of the number and powers of the various police agencies which exist throughout the country. It includes Gideon v. Wainwright (where the Supreme Court established the right of appointed counsel for indigent in all criminal cases), Terry v. Ohio (where the Supreme Court recognized the right of police officers to stop and frisk people merely suspected of wrongdoing), Miranda v. Arizona (where the Supreme Court established the famous rights of the same name...most popularized on the TV show Dragnet), and Gregg v. Georgia (where the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty provided that juries awarding it were given sufficient guidelines upon which to make their decision).

"Equal Protection of the Law"

This area is also critical because of the way in which it reflects official sensitivity to racial and minority concerns. It includes the cases of Cooper v. Aaron (where it told Arkansas governor Orval Faubus it meant business in terms of school desegregation), Heart of Atlanta Hotel v. United States (wherein the Supreme Court upheld law which said that even private businesses can't discriminate in offering services), Loving v. Virgina (which overturned a Virginia law prohibiting black/white marriages), Palmer v. Thompson (which allowed the closure of a public swimming pool for the reason that all residents were thereafter deprived of the services that had previously been offered there), Regent v. Bakke (which did away with affirmative action quotas but nonetheless permitted race to remain a factor in determining college admissions), and San Antonio v. Rodriguez (which let stand a funding desparity between the various school systems in a state...critical because the desparity operated in that case to the detriment of hispanic students).

"A Right of Personal Privacy"

The two cases treated here are Roe v. Wade (creating the right to abortion) and Bowers v. Hardwick (upholding an antisodomy law which defined homosexual sex as being sodomy and therefore criminally punishable).

To be sure, owing to the publication date of this book, the cases are all dated but what's important here is that actually hearing the arguments give one of sense of just exactly how the legal reasoning process works. For serious students interested in learning more about US Supreme Court practice and procedure I would highly recommend both this book and Bob Woodward's very excellent (but also admittedly dated) The Brethren.

The book arrived in great condition. The material covered is great. I am very pleased.

If you are looking for some education on cases and how the court works, this is great.