Qty:1
  • List Price: $27.50
  • Save: $2.50 (9%)
FREE Shipping on orders over $35.
In Stock.
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Gift-wrap available.
Add to Cart
FREE Shipping on orders over $35.
Used: Like New | Details
Sold by happycustomers
Condition: Used: Like New
Comment: Gift quality! Eligible for FREE Super Saving Shipping! Fast Amazon shipping plus a hassle free return policy! Tracking number provided in your Amazon account. International shipping available.
Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.
Add to Cart
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Saying What the Law Is: The Constitution in the Supreme Court Paperback – October 6, 2005

ISBN-13: 978-0674019546 ISBN-10: 0674019547

Buy New
Price: $25.00
20 New from $6.91 24 Used from $1.01
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback
"Please retry"
$25.00
$6.91 $1.01

Free%20Two-Day%20Shipping%20for%20College%20Students%20with%20Amazon%20Student




Frequently Bought Together

Saying What the Law Is: The Constitution in the Supreme Court + Constitutional Faith
Price for both: $45.41

Buy the selected items together
  • Constitutional Faith $20.41

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Save up to 90% on Textbooks
Rent textbooks, buy textbooks, or get up to 80% back when you sell us your books. Shop Now

Product Details

  • Paperback: 336 pages
  • Publisher: Harvard University Press (October 6, 2005)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0674019547
  • ISBN-13: 978-0674019546
  • Product Dimensions: 0.8 x 6.1 x 9 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
  • Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,727,122 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Editorial Reviews

Review

Charles Fried has been, by turns, advocate, judge and scholar in the field of constitutional law. He has now given us a wonderful book on the subject, a work of sparkling intelligence and moral maturity. Fried believes in the possibility of constitutional doctrine, in the careful and reasoned elaboration of constitutional principles over time. For those who think that the work of the Supreme Court is just politics in disguise, Fried's defense of the rule of reason in doctrinal development is a compelling riposte. Never giving up on reason's ambition while remaining clear-eyed about its limits, Fried offers a guide and model for those who hope to understand the work of the Supreme Court as it strives patiently to say what the law is. (Anthony T. Kronman, Dean, Yale Law School)

Charles Fried is the ideal guide for the nonspecialist who wants to understand the decisions of the Supreme Court. The book's brilliant exposition ranges from the fundamental principles of constitutional law to the Court's most recent landmark cases. Fried's experience as a professor, a judge, and a frequent practitioner before the Supreme Court makes this an authoritative as well as a very personal volume. It should be read by anyone who wants a deep understanding of how the Supreme Court influences the law and our daily lives. (Martin Feldstein, Professor of Economics, Harvard University and President, National Bureau of Economic Research)

To read this book is to enter into a fascinating conversation about the most important constitutional puzzles with a legal thinker of uncommon wisdom, unique experience, and a most unusual immersion in the real world. In Saying What the Law Is, Charles Fried draws brilliantly and elegantly on the unparalleled mix of perspectives that his remarkable life in the law has made possible--a mix that gives rich texture and broadly illuminating power to his understanding both of the basic architecture and of the fascinating oddities of the legal rules and principles through which our Constitution's generalities assume concrete meaning. I find myself no less enlightened by Fried's prose when he is pursuing a line of thought with which I disagree than when he is echoing my own views perfectly. At the same time, he portrays and illustrates the sweeping landscape of constitutional law in a way that should prove accessible as well as intriguing to intelligent non-specialists. This is a book that no one who cares about the United States Constitution should fail to read. (Laurence H. Tribe, Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School)

One-time prosecutor, judge, and now Constitutional theorist Fried creates a framework for understanding the role of Constitutional doctrine in dictating and guiding the intricate relationships between government and the political and social structures it purports to control. Fried addresses one of the toughest challenges facing the student of federalism: aside from the powers specifically granted by the Constitution to Congress and the President, what becomes of the rest of the balance of powers that a government might enjoy?...Fried strongly advances the theory that the Constitution was the creation of the states, which transferred some part of their sovereignty to the new national government, rather than an original creation of the sovereign people of the nation as a whole. (Philip Y. Blue Library Journal 2004-03-16)

Saying What the Law Is offers moderation in almost every sense. Fried dispassionately discusses recent controversies in constitutional law while also spelling out a theory about how the Supreme Court should go about its work. By giving paramount importance to modest and principled judicial decision making, Fried's theory simply continues a distinguished tradition of searching for a principled approach to constitutional law...Saying What the Law Is is important not only for the renewed case it makes for the process tradition, but for its accessibility to the educated layperson. (Andrew J. Morris Legal Times 2004-05-03)

Saying What the Law Is is an excellent primer on constitutional adjudication...The book is a nuanced presentation of law not just as a set of concepts, but also as a discipline practiced by courts that must translate concepts into doctrine, and apply that doctrine to decide cases. Professor Fried's goal is not simply to lay out the current black letter law, though he does this very well. Rather, it is to convey an understanding of the doctrine...The result is a sophisticated review of the Court's jurisprudence, coupled with insightful proposals for restoring principle to the law in areas where it falls short...In this time of polarizing debate, Fried's book represents a mature reflection on principles, rather than just another salvo in partisan wars. As such, it is a valuable and refreshing contribution. (Kevin J. Doyle FindLaw 2004-05-14)

Review

Charles Fried has been, by turns, advocate, judge and scholar in the field of constitutional law. He has now given us a wonderful book on the subject, a work of sparkling intelligence and moral maturity. Fried believes in the possibility of constitutional doctrine, in the careful and reasoned elaboration of constitutional principles over time. For those who think that the work of the Supreme Court is just politics in disguise, Fried's defense of the rule of reason in doctrinal development is a compelling riposte. Never giving up on reason's ambition while remaining clear-eyed about its limits, Fried offers a guide and model for those who hope to understand the work of the Supreme Court as it strives patiently to say what the law is. (Anthony T. Kronman, Dean, Yale Law School) --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

4.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
1
4 star
0
3 star
1
2 star
0
1 star
0
See both customer reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful By not me VINE VOICE on November 19, 2004
Format: Hardcover
This book is an overview and critique of constitutional doctrine in areas such as federalism, freedom of speech, and equal protection. Fried writes economically, has argued constitutional cases before the Supreme Court, and offers fascinating insights into the nature of constitutional adjudication. However, the reader should know that Fried's analysis is narrowly legal, and almost devoid of historical, biographical, or political context. In fact, the discussion is so abstract that readers without a constitutional law background will have difficulty following the analysis at many points. On the other hand, readers who stay abreast of these issues will enjoy the book. (I'm a former lawyer.)
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful By DonAthos on February 11, 2007
Format: Paperback
I'm not a lawyer, but I am a citizen of the United States and, as such, I have a vested interest in Constitutional law. Perhaps the same is true of you. If so, you might want to read this book, but read on before coming to that decision.

Charles Fried's "Saying What the Law Is," is a look at the development and current state of Constitutional 'doctrine' in a variety of areas, along with Fried's own analysis as to whether or not the current doctrines are strong and likely to last, or whether they may amount to an abberation, subject to overturn at some future date.

The book is very scholarly, and I had to proceed slowly--some might take this as a drawback. On the other hand, I wonder how worthwhile such a book would be if it were *not* scholarly, *not* requiring a person to stop, consider and reflect as he read? I suspect that any analysis of Constitutional law worthy of its subject will require a bit of application in the reading. The subject is comprised, after all, of weighty matters, debated over hundreds of years, by incredibly learned men and women. If we have to spend a few minutes more digesting the topics and arguments, that's no knock on Fried and his write-up.

That said, and despite the fact that I have no professional background in law, I did not find the book above me at all. Some of the concepts--like stare decisis--were still familiar to me from either some lower division government survey course I'd taken once (or possibly some novel); other concepts, such as the difference between substantive and procedural due process, were new. However, Fried writes intentionally for the layman, and so he explains as he goes.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Customer Images

Search