Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
The Conservative Assault on the Constitution Hardcover – September 28, 2010
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
“Erwin Chemerinsky knows the Constitution as a legal scholar and the Supreme Court as a lawyer who represents clients there. It’s a rare and powerful combination that makes him uniquely qualified to write this disturbing and persuasive book about the impact of the current Supreme Court’s approach to constitutional interpretation.”
—Linda Greenhouse, Lecturer, Yale Law School; former New York Times Supreme Court correspondent
"Our Constitution depends on the courts to keep it alive; we all depend on Erwin Chemerinsky to remind us why that is so important. This book is essential reading for anyone who cares about preserving our constitutional birthright."
—Susan N. Herman, President, American Civil Liberties Union
About the Author
Erwin Chemerinsky is the founding dean of the University of California Irvine Law School. He is a graduate of Northwestern University and Harvard Law School. After teaching law at DePaul College of Law, he moved to the University of Southern California, where he taught from 1983 to 2004. He frequently argued cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals in various jurisdictions and occasionally before the U.S. Supreme Court. He is well known in Los Angeles, where he helped draft a new city charter (he chaired the charter commission), issued a report on the city's police department, and commented on the O.J. Simpson trial. From 2004 to 2008 he taught at Duke University School of Law, before returning to southern California to start the law school at UCI.
He is the author of Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies, a widely used law school textbook.
Browse award-winning titles. See more
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
The Conservative Assault on the Constitution is a must read book for anyone who cares about the application of the Constitution. Distinguished law professor and constitutional expert Erwin Chemerinsky takes us through the most interesting legal issues of our time and the impact that the composition of the Supreme Court has on such legal decisions. Fascinating book indeed even to a person like me who is most inclined to reading books about science or religion. The book is composed of the following six chapters: Separate and Unequal Schools, The Imperious Presidency, Dismantling the Wall Separating Church and State, The Vanishing Rights of Criminal Defendants, The Erosion of Individual Liberties and the Closing of the Courthouse Doors. It also includes a conclusion and an incisive introduction.
1. A well written, clearly laid out book that shows how Supreme Court decisions impact our lives.
2. Constitutional law in plain English by a distinguished lawyer.
3. This book was a treat to read from cover to cover.
4. Every conceivable important legal issue was covered in this book.
5. One of the most important decisions a President has to make is the appointment of Supreme Court Judges. A point that is clearly made with luxury of details. As an example, President Nixon had four vacancies to fill by contrast President Carter had none. Such decisions leave a permanent mark in our history.
6. Great history on the selection of various Judges and how their voting record actually turned out versus the original perception. Examples of the aforementioned include Justices Souter and O'Connor.
7. A great lesson on how our schools are in fact separate and unequal.
8. My favorite chapter has to do with the dismantling of the wall of separation of Church and State. Justice Souter stated "compelling an individual to support religion violates the fundamental principal of freedom of conscience".
9. Great supporting information abound to support the author's key points. Many great links to studies.
10. So many great issues discussed: three strikes, assisted death, abortion, criminal rights, personal injuries, individual liberties, etc...
11. Interesting and fascinating tidbits about some of the Justices and their voting history. As an example, Justice Thomas may well in fact be the most conservative Justice of the Supreme Court.
12. One of the most eye-opening books that clearly demonstrates a direct correlation with our lives.
1. Conservatives are most likely not inclined to read this book but should.
2. I would have liked to have seen illustrations showing the composition of the courts over the years (eras if you will) and voting records on the most important issues. As an example, we know that the Warren Court was a liberal court and I would have liked the composition of that court and a summary of most important cases. It would have certainly have enhanced this great book.
3. Having to wait for Mr. Chemerinsky's next book.
In summary, a fascinating book that focuses on how conservative Justices have assaulted our Constitution. An eloquently written book that conveys profound legal concepts for the masses, an accomplishment indeed. I want to thank Mr. Chemerinsky for making this book accessible and interesting. I can't recommend this book enough. Bravo!
Overall, this is a work that any reasonably minded person should read in order to be more informed and aware of how the Supreme Court's works may affect every citizen's life.
He sounds the the way he always does: Possessed of an uncanny and almost omniscient grasp of recent Supreme Court decisions. But what can he tell us about how conservatives have hijacked the courts and turned the Constitution into a necromancer's spell?
The story is by now familiar to all practitioners. Beginning with President Richard Nixon, the right has taken aim at the courts, the Supreme Court in particular. It has created an ideology all its own, originalism, and has transformed it into a cloak used to advance a very contemporary agenda: support for school desegregation has eroded, as have the rights of those accused of crime. Although we give lip service to federalism, the power of the federal government has grown at the expense of the people. The courts are increasingly friendly to big business and hostile to civil rights claims. Anyone who has practiced law during the past 20 years has watched the courts drift further and further to the right.
I was encouraged to see Chemerinsky chronicle this trend. I am so caught up in individual cases I often fail to see the larger picture. I know that civil rights claims rarely make it to a jury trial any longer. I know that the Fourth Amendment is vanishing. I know that immunity claims for government officials expand year by year. But I really didn't have a sense of what a tidal wave these changes represent until reading Chemerinsky's book. A good law school professor and dean, he is a patient teacher.
I was encouraged to read him take aim at sovereign immunity, the bizarre notion that in this republic of ours government is somehow beyond the reach of ordinary justice: "A doctrine derived from the premise `the king can do no wrong' deserves no place in American law. The United States was founded on rejection of monarchy and royal prerogative. American government is based on the fundamental recognition that the government and government officials can do wrong and must be held accountable. Sovereign immunity undermines that basic notion." Amen, I say.
Oddly, Chemerinsky writes about sovereign immunity but neglects mention of an even more potent tool in the conservative arsenal of weapons used to keep ordinary people out of court, qualified immunity. This most obvious tool of judicial activism gives the benefit of the doubt to government actors in close cases and accounts for more dismissals prior to trial than any other legal doctrine. By way of example, the Practicing Law Institute in New York each year published a two-volume practice aid on litigation arising under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a federal statute that permits ordinary people to sue government actors for violating a person's federal rights. Fifteen years ago, one small chapter in the second volume of the aid was devoted to qualified immunity. The second volume of last year's aid was devoted to qualified immunity cases, and was more than 1,000 pages long. Just where did this doctrine come from? No one claims he framers intended it; no statute was passed by Congress to limit these claims. No, conservative judges cooked it up, and when they did, no one complained it was due to activism. I wanted to hear Chemerinsky's take on this doctrine. Strangely, the book is silent on the topic.
Chemerinsky calls for an end to the sham federal judicial confirmation hearings have become. He notes, correctly, that there is no such thing as a neutral way to interpret the constitution. Policy references are required to apply constitutional doctrine to conflict. We should require judges to answer hard questions about controversies rather than permit them to dodge questioning with dishonest locutions suggesting that Supreme Court justices are mere umpires: they do make law. We are entitled to know what kind of laws they will make on cases likely to come before them. If they won't answer questions honestly, then perhaps the Senate ought to refuse to vote to confirm. That would be a refreshing change.
The Constitution is not a democratic document, he argues. It is designed to create a constitutional democracy in which minorities are provided protection against the will of a majority. Yes, a majority of Americans may want prayer in the schools. That does not mean the Court stages a coup when it votes against school prayer: it simply means the minority is protected from a majority that is too filled with its own vision of the good to respect competing visions.
This book is a good read on recent and emerging trends in constitutional doctrine: It is, after all, the work of one of the nation's foremost professors of constitutional law. But for all that, the book delivers far less than it promises. It is not enough to remind again and again that our liberties hang in a balance far too often tipped by 5-4 votes. That this rightward coup has taken place is apparent. Chemerinsky avoids discussing the social and intellectual history of how this happened. I wanted to read about the creation, funding and staffing of right-wing think tanks, and the hijinks of the Federalist Society. These were the seedbeds of the surge to the right; originalism's secret history was first worked out at retreats and seminars. It became the ticket to judicial advancement only after it first won the hearts and minds of law students, professors and intellectuals patrolling think tanks and looking for power. The book providing a critical history of this has not yet been written.
This book is vintage Chemerinsky: concise, accurate in the main, and delivered with the crisp good will of a man who can recite the Supreme Court's recent doctrinal history almost as if from memory. But for all its brilliance, the book has a detached feel. It is the book of an intellectual unfamiliar with conflict at the trial level. That doesn't make it a bad book; it is simply limited. But do read it. If nothing else, it will serve as a counterweight to the silent coup taking place decision by decision in the United States Supreme Court.