Customer Reviews

The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Since its initial publication in 1992, The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States has served as a valuable resource on the history of the Court. With articles on the justices, their key decisions, legal philosophies, and even aspects of Court life, the Companion has been an indispensable addition for anyone interested in American law or the history of the Court.

With the passage of time, though, the need for an update taking into account subsequent cases and topics has only grown. This need has now been met with the second edition, which includes new articles on a variety of topics, and revision of many of the earlier ones. While a few mistakes were missed (the entry on Supreme Court clerks, for example, was not updated to include Stephen Breyer among the names of the justices who previously served as clerks) and while the bibliographies at the end of each article have only been indifferently updated (while the entry on William O. Douglas includes Bruce Allen Murphy's recent biography, the one on Benjamin Cardozo includes neither of the important books written about him over the past decade), the overall result is a work of continuing utility for readers and scholars alike.

As the nation prepares to welcome the seventeenth Chief Justice, this book is a wonderful guide to the processes of the least 'media-exposed' branch of the federal government and its highest institution, the Supreme Court.

This book has many handy features for researchers and general enthusiasts. There are brief biographies - personal, professional and judicial - of each of the Chief Justices and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court (there have been 108 in all, with 113 appointments, as 5 Associate Justices have later been appointed as Chief Justice) together with pictures of each. There are synopses of over 400 of the most pivotal cases in the history of the Supreme Court (Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, even Bush v. Gore from the year 2000) - each of these cases is presented with voting record (who wrote the opinion, who concurred, who dissented, and who wrote additional opinions) as well as the pertinent issues in the cases and the implications of the decisions.

This is a very comprehensive guide. There are essays on key issues that are very thorough - for example, the essay on 'Federalism' is an eleven page entry that includes general political principles as well as court work. There are essays on each Article of the Constitution as well as each of the Amendments. One of the longest entries is the essay on 'History of the Court', subdivided into major chronological sections - this is one of the best, brief encapsulations of the history of the high court and how it is has made an impacted (and in turn been influenced by) society that I have read. There are also entries on the physical structures of the court - the essay on the building gives an historical overview of where and in what setting the court has met, and minor entries include features of the current building (for example, there is a short entry entitled 'Barber Shop', which talks about the facility for Justices and male employees of the court to get a haircut - it mentions nothing of where O'Connor, Ginsburg or the female court employees might get their hair done). One also learns that there is a basketball court in the gymnasium of the Supreme Court, but that basketball is prohibited while the court is in session, as the dribbling balls can be heard in the court chamber.

There are also entries on key judicial concepts. The concept of Constitutional Interpretation is something that many people take for granted, but is in fact an continually changing methodology. There are Common Law concepts such as the Writ of Mandamus and Writ of Certiorari (each have an entry) as well as the more structured Writ of Habeas Corpus. One also discovers here that 'Mootness' is a word.

There are several appendices that are also handy features. The first appendix, appropriately, is the full text of the Constitution. The second appendix lays out the nominations, terms and succession of the Justices in several ways, including an interesting graphical representation organised alongside presidential terms, as well another chronology that shows number of days without a full court appointed (when we imagine that a few months is a long time to go in the nomination and approval process, we can see that from 1843 to 1846, there were 965 days without a full court).

For trivia buffs, appendix three is a fun piece - there is a listing of the trivia and traditions of the court, divided into 'Firsts' and more general 'Trivia'. Too bad it doesn't list why Chief Justice Rehnquist wore stripes on his sleeves as Chief Justice! Perhaps that is an update for the third edition.

This is a book with great information, as well as a good deal of spirit and wit. It is a valuable addition to any library.

_The Oxford Companion to the United States Supreme Court of the United States_ (Kermit Hall, ed.) is a massive tome containing a vast swath of information: cases, traditions, theories of constitutional interpretations, historical events, and biographies of all of the Supreme Court Justices. It has the same material (word for word) as Kermit Hall's _The Oxford Guide to United States Supreme Court Decisions_ but this is much more worthwhile reference work because it contains more contextual material than the cases themselves. This book is by no means exhaustive, but it provides a very informative overview of what the Supreme Court has been up to for the past two hundred years and the very different personalities serving on the body.

This volume was published in 1991 and has since been re-edited to inform readers of more current opinions and changes. The Chief Editor Kermit Hall and Associate Editors James W. Ely, Jr., Joel B. Grossman, and Wimmiam M. Wiecek did a good job of organizing the materials and essays in this book.

The cases and events re the history of the U.S. Supreme Court are arranged alphabetically. The editors did a good job of organizing the cases and giving the historical/legal background of each case. One current complaint re the U.S. Supreme Court Justices is that they have been too active. The editors were clear that the members of the U.S. Supreme Court were just as active if not more so in early U.S. National History. The first well known case titled MARBURY VS. MADISON (1803)was historically interesting. John Marshall and his Associate Justices knew they did not have the "clout" to uphold the "Midnight" Appointments" made by John Adams (1735-1826)who was the U.S. President from 1797-1801. When these appointments were refused by President Jefferson, the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. What the Surpreme Court Justices did was declare that part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 under which the Midnight Appointments were made was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court Justices removed themselves from a weak position and set a legal precedent for Judicial Review which was part of the English Constitutional system for centuries.

The editors included cases that were heard during the 1820s upholding the Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1). This decision involved Dartmouth College and was decided in 1819. These cases which were decided in early National U.S.History set the precedent and example for cases decided in Post Bellum U.S. History.

The Post W.W. I cases were interesting and demonstrated an active U.S. Supreme Court. Many stupid state laws that were enacted by state legislatures. For example, the case titled MEYER V. NEBRASKA(1923) overturned a stupid Nebraska law that forbade the teaching of foreign languages prior to the 8th. grade and German to anyone under 18. The short presentation in this book explained the Supreme Court's reasoning re privacy and useful knowledge.

Another interesting case involving freedom of religion and expression was titled PIERCE VS THE SOCIETY OF SISTERS. The Oregon state legislature,influecned by Ku Klux Klan and anti-Catholic groups passed another stupid law outlawing Catholic schools. The nuns prevailed in the Oregon Appeals Courts and eventually in the U.S. Supreme Court by a 9-0 ruling. This ruling, which the book's editors noted, was important involving other religious groups such as the Mennonites.

A case that should get more attention was titled GITLOW VS. NEW YORK (1925). This is a "landmark" case. Benjamin Gitlow was convicted in the state of New York in 1923 for writing and publishing "Communist and Syndicalist" books and pamphlets which New York state law had criminalized. While Gitlow lost his appeal by a 7-2 decision, the civil libertarians won the war. Chief Justice Sanford agreed with Gitlow that his First Amendment Rights were protected from infringement by the states via the first paragraph of the Fourteenth Amendment (1868). While Chief Justice Sanford upheld Gitlow's conviction, he did agree that the Fourteenth Amendment protected individual liberty via the Fourteenth Amendment which was the first time the U.S. Supreme Court Justices incorporated the Bill of Rights to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment. This meant that oppressive state laws could be more easily challenged. As an aside, Justice Holmes made a terse remark in dissent when he challenged the comment that Gitlow's books were an incitement to action. Holmes retorted that every idea is an incitement to action. Readers should note that Gitlow DID NOT preach nor incite violence in his work.

This reviewer was intrigued by a 1956 case titled PENNSYLVANIA VS. NELSON. Nelson was convicted under a stupid Pennsylvania law that targeted him because he was a member of the Communist Party. The Pennsylvania Supreme Justices and the U.S. Supreme Court Justices overturned his conviction. The undersigned lived in Pennsylvania at the time and remembers the anti-communist hysteria that prevailed among some self imposed professional anti-communists and their blind followers. College presidents and teachers were communists for simply insisting on First Amendment Rights.

The editors did a good job re another case about privacy in a case titled GRISWOLD V. CONNECTICUT (1965). The case was decided by a 7-2 decision whereby a Connecticut law passed in 1879 outlawing medical advice, medicine, devices, etc. that prevented contraception. The decision focused on Fourth Amendment Rights protecting U.S. citizens from unreasonable search and seizure. However, Justice Goldberg further ruled that Ninth Amendment Rights were an issue because a married couple's decision about having children is an unenumerated right. The editors' explanation of this case was clear.

The editors also had clear explanations of criminal defendants' Miranda Rights. The fact that poor defendents who are not aware of their rights can be pressured into confessing to crimes they did not commit was taken into account. Legal representation for those who cannot afford it can give those who with low or no income some chance of defending themselves in criminal cases. The editors explained the background to case title GIDEON VS WAINWRIGHT (1963)whereby the defendent was eventually aquitted of a false charge. The case titled MIRANDA VS ARIZONA (1966)was covered very well in this book.

The editors did a good job in providing readers with short biographical material on the Justices of the Supreme Court. There is a case and topic index for quick reference. As one reviewer noted, this book is a good source to get an accurate view of Supreme Court decisions regardless of legal background. This book is a good companion to a casebook re Constitutional Law.

James E. Egolf

August 16, 2009

This volume is equally as good as the first edition only it's been brought up to date. Unfortunately the Supreme Court is not static and decisions keep appearing which will eventually make a third edition necessary. In the meantime one can purchase this book and use it as a handy reference in researching Supreme Court decisions that impact our current political landscape.

Much care and effort went into this work and the result shows. It is readable and poignant. Some entries may take careful reading to understand fully, and others are quite lengthy (who'd have thought that "Federalism" would take so many pages to explain), but overall this is a very handy book.

The only problem is what to do with the first edition once this one arrives at your door. One possibility is to do what I did, bring the first edition to the cabin.

I occasionally get into arguments with other lawyers and people who are interested in legal matters, including particularly hotly contested matters like the right to privacy, the limits of federal power, civil liberties, etc.

When I need to cite authority, or just double-check to make sure that I have described the legal or historical matter accurately, I almost always turn to this book. It offers scholarly but readable treatments of Supreme Court decisions, personalities and Constitutional and legal issues that are detailed but succinct. It even offers biographies with many illustrations.

This is the Second Edition and it offers especially good articles about cases like Bush v. Gore and Lawrence v. Texas, as well as, for example, a lengthy treatment of the right to privacy (that was reinforced in part in Lawrence by extensive and implicit re-affirmation of the Roe v. Wade decision). One thing I noticed in the article about John M. Harlan is that there was not much about his opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, where he embraced what would today be likely considered an expansive view of freedoms and rights that are not explicitly in the Consitution, but, in his words, "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty". I would like to see Anthony Kennedy pick up where he left off, and he has to some degree.

Along these lines, the book has a superb treatment of that curiously neglected but very important Ninth Amendment and points out the inconsistency and absurdity of what most modern so-called "conservatives" have say about the issue of "unenumerated rights". Basically, the issue is whether the Constitution protects rights that are not explicitly referred to, which was the intent of the framers and more or less what Harlan was getting at in his Griswold opinion.

Because there are many contributors, there is some inconsistency in that some articles are better than others, but that is inevitable. And this Second Edition is to some extent already out of date in that both Roberts and Alito are not in it, since it was published in 2005. Yet I was until recently using the First Edition. I highly recommend this, especially if you are reading or plan to read Jeffrey Toobin's terrfic book THE NINE.

For a good look at the Supreme Court, its beginnings, its members from the start, and an alpahbetical array of all of its decisions from day one, besides a dictionary-like definition of legal terms commonly used, this weighty (in every sense of the word) reference is hard to beat, for the everyday person with interest and the diligent law student.

Oxford Companions are some of the most indispensable reference books on the market, and this particular Oxford Companion is one of the strongest within the Oxford Series. This particular volume leaves no stone unturned with 1272 pages of cross-referenced material on the Court, and has approximately 300 pages more than the 1992 version.

From biographies of all justices who have ever served on the Court, to case summaries, both the famous ones to the not-so-famous ones, to legal terminology, this book has virtually anything you ever wanted to know about the United States Supreme Court. And more. Like the best of the Oxford Companion series, the entries contained within are accessible to virtually anyone who picks up the tome.

As a reference guide to the Supreme Court, I doubt there is another book which can meet the needs of both the lay person and the professional, in one single volume such as this. A must have for any reference library.

Possibly the best reference book in the entire Oxford Companion series, and that is saying quite alot.

I bought this as a reference work, but I have found that it is a good read, also. Discussions of cases go into the details of what the issues of each case were, what the decision of the majority and minority of the court was, and the reasoning behind the decision. It also gives a clear understanding of the place of the Supreme Court in American government and life. This is a must for those who wish to understand the Supreme Court and how it came to be what it is now.

It is difficult to say whether the contentious atmosphere that currently exists regarding the legal opinions of the Supreme Court is greater than any other time in the history of the United States. There have been times, especially during the Civil War and World War I when the Supreme Court raised the ire of many a citizen. Some of the "activist" justices, as some of them are now called, could perhaps be designated as "activist light" if compared with some of the justices of the past. This book gives ample evidence for this comparison, but also gives information on a wide variety of legal issues that the Supreme Court has had to deal with throughout its history. It would probably not be read from cover to cover, but instead serves as a general reference for those readers who are not and do not intend to become legal scholars, but are curious as to the reasoning patterns deployed by the justices who sat on the Court. Readers who are approaching this subject for the first time will find many surprises about the Court, both in the opinions expressed by the judges and in their personal histories and backgrounds. It is fair to say that legal opinions are guided predominantly by the historical context in which they are put forth, and this claim seems to gain more substantiation as more articles in this book are read and studied.

One of the more surprising things to learn from this book is that the Supreme Court never really considered free speech issues with the First Amendment until as late as 1919, in Schenck v. United States. This case is also discussed in this book, and revolves around Charles Schenck, who was general secretary of the Socialist party of the time. Schenck and a few other defendants were convicted with a violation of the 1917 Espionage Act by conspiring to obstruct military recruiting and enlistment via the circulation of pamphlet. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the unanimous opinion for the court ruling against Schenck and defendants and thus upholding their conviction. This case was the first time the famous statement of "crying fire in a public theatre" was used to restrict an "absolutist" interpretation of the First Amendment. It could also be viewed as an example of how even legal authorities, who are supposed to be calm and rational during emergencies or times of war, can succumb to the pressures of the times (in this case the pre- and post-war hysteria of World War I) and not be able to divorce themselves from their past personal histories (Holmes himself was wounded three times while serving in the Union Army during the Civil War). The Holmes Court effectively said that the First Amendment is not to be taken literally, and if speech presents a "clear and present danger" then governmental agencies have the right to punish the purveyors of this speech. Free speech issues dominant legal discussions at the present time, and the legal standing of "hate speech" is discussed in an article in this book. One can find solace in knowing that the Supreme Court has not found "hate speech" to be prohibited by the Constitution, despite attempts of many groups to justify its prohibition by appeals to constitutional law. The article on "hate speech" discusses some of these cases and gives a few references.

Without doubt the most despicable legal decision ever put forth by the Supreme Court was the case Scott v. Sandford in 1857. Known famously as the `Dred Scott Case', it is characterized in this book as one of the most important cases in American constitutional law. The decision essentially said that blacks are not citizens of the United States and therefore could not sue in federal courts. In addition, slaves were "property" that was "protected" by the Constitution. Naturally, and justifiably from a moral standpoint, the decision provoked hostile reaction against the Court, and the justices who ruled against Scott clearly were "activist heavy". In reference to the Dred Scott decision, the abolitionist William Garrison was justified in his statement that the Constitution was a "a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell."

The case Roe v. Wade is also discussed at length in this book, as expected. It will be interesting to see whether this case is overturned in the near future. If it is it might be because of a kind of `legal fatigue' that seems to be setting in dialog about the case. The arguments both for and against Roe v. Wade are repeated over and over again and have become almost platitudes. Rather than being a complicated Constitutional issue, is seems that the legal reasoning surrounding Roe v. Wade has become desiccated and has exhausted itself, offering no further insights or justifications for privacy.