| ||||||||||||||||||
Having foresworn objective analysis, Boot also admits to a lack of solutions to the problems he identifies. While he proposes a handful of reforms that do little to address what he criticizes, he rejects a wide variety of radical proposals with a few sentences each. Boot suggests more scrutiny of judges through lawyers' reports and public debate. Left unspoken is the fact that the most prominent public debate of judicial decision-making in the last 12 years involved the author of his introduction, Judge Robert Bork, and came to a result Boot disliked. And Boot's endorsement of rating judges by lawyers ignores that such ratings have as often resulted in unfair criticism of judges (including one Boot singles out as a good egg) for holding lawyers to strict standards as it has to expose incompetence that remains unaddressed.
So what's left is a long list of anecdotes, loosely organized by them, tied together only by their common desire to criticize. Thus, Judge Ito should not have let the Simpson trial be overrun by publicity, but a Chicago judge is hit for earthily barring attorneys from talking to the press.
In one chapter, judges have too much power and abuse it; in another, incompetents fill the judiciary because smart lawyers can have more influence by refusing appointments. The reader is to assume that the mere fact Boot has held these judges up to criticism should be enough.
For a more reasoned analysis of the judicial system, see Richard Posner's The Federal Courts (1996). Those wishing for the polemic can read either Robert Bork's The Tempting Of America (1991) or Ralph Nader's No Contest (1996), depending on your preconceived political bent. --Ted Frank
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Well-written, but superficial polemic,
By
This review is from: Out Of Order: Arrogance, Corruption, And Incompetence On The Bench (Paperback)
Whether you are liberal or conservative, Max Boot's "Out of Order" is likely to get you mad. Mad because the judicial system is painted as so-out-of-control, or mad because you think Boot is a conservative hack (who writes for the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages).What Boot has done, and done effectively, is gather horrible anecdote after horrible anecdote, organize them in general categories like corrupt judges, incompetent judges, and so on. The picture that he paints is pretty grim: if a judge isn't on the take, he or she might be plain weak, stupid, arrogant, or deluded. But how seriously are we to take Boot's thesis? While the individual cases that he discusses are (to varying degrees) disturbing, the central problem with this book lies in the fact that the reader is supposed to evaluate a judge based on one case, out of thousands or more that the judge might see in his or her career. At the same time, Boot strangely ignores some obvious targets for those who would like to criticize the judiciary. For example, Judge Stephen Reinhardt (a federal appeals judge in California) is usually the posterchild for judicial activism: he is one of the judges most-often reversed by the Supreme Court. Yet, Judge Reinhardt rates only one mention, and it is actually praise from Boot. Now, I'm not suggesting necessarily that Boot would think that Reinhardt is worthy of criticism (though I think it fairly obvious, given their respective ideologies), but there is a history and pattern of judicial opinions from which one could draw definite conclusions. As other reviewers have noted, this is a critical weakness of "Out of Order." It's a collection of anecdotes, almost a survey of judges across the country, but not very deep in its scope.
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Thoughtful, entertaining, not bad for a nonlawyer,
By A Customer
This review is from: Out Of Order: Arrogance, Corruption, And Incompetence On The Bench (Hardcover)
Max Boot has shown himself to be a thoughtful writer and deputy features editor for the Wall Street Journal. I have enjoyed his work in that paper for several years. His book is a thoughtful, entertaining and at times enraging look at the judiciary in this country. It falls prey to what I consider to be a congenital shortcoming which is the fact that the author is a journalist and not a lawyer or even a law school graduate. Hence, this is essentially someone who is intelligent and well informed but is still "on the outside looking in." Like all top-notch journalists, he is adept at "getting up to speed" and doing the research necessary to speak effectively on the subjects he writes about. I've had several dealings with Wall Street and NY Times journalists and editors and I have to say that Max Boot is perhaps the least insufferable, smug and self-impressed of the bunch. (Take this for the compliment it is. If you knew these folks you'd realize just how self-impressed they are when it comes to hawking their own books and to "playing up" their purported expertise on various substantive subjects like the American legal system.) Max Boot is an intelligent, workmanlike writer who has done his homework on an important subject.
3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Anecdotal but interesting,
By A Customer
This review is from: Out Of Order: Arrogance, Corruption, And Incompetence On The Bench (Hardcover)
Those interested in the role of the judiciary in America will find three types of books available on the subject: "Anecdotal", such as Max Boots's series of essays on various court decisions; The second category is, "Detailed", such as Walkowski/Connolly's "From Trial Court to the United States Supreme Court" which covers a major case from the lowest to the highest level and shows how the system works; and third, there are those categorized as "Biolgraphical", such as Ed Lazarus' book "Closed Chambers" which gives us an insight into the workings of the court from the inside. Max Boot's book, is informative and, like a Wall Street op-ed piece, interesting for what it does. It stimulates our imagination and compels those interested in the subject to look deeper, hence the other categories. All in all, I read it and enjoyed it, but found myself wanting more detail than was available. Still, I recommend it, as well as a peek into the other areas as well for a more complete perspective of the problem.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|