Unfortunately, I was taught "traditional Constitutional Law" in a "Top 50 Law School". While I have never ingested LSD, each class lecture felt like I assume an LSD trip felt like, bizarre and strange.
The Heritage Guide To The Constitution begins (after the introduction and preamble) with Article I, Section 1. How novel!
Then, this book methodically will state (especially in the Bill of Rights) the history of the clause, origins (citing examples to England)and U.S. case law which might cite the clause or section.
While I have always had a traditional or "Originalist" view of the U.S. Constitution, that was gained for reading about a dozen books in the almost 30 years since graduation from law school, The Heritage Guide... lays all the history and arguments (mostly from an "Originalist" perspective)out in a logical order, clause by clause. It cites other learned works, cases, historical documents.
Generally, the Constitutional Law taught in most "Top 50 Law Schools" is that of "Warren Court" or the "Living Constitution". That is, the Judiciary, especially the lifetime appointed federal judiciary, function is to interpret the Constitution in light of today's society, values, and traditions, not the intentions of the Framers. They teach and believe that the judiciary function is "to do what is best" for this citizens, because they (the judiciary) are not political (I can tell you that is false) and are not emotional like the legislative branch.
As an example of the thinking above, I was presiding over a criminal trial recently, and the defense attorney told the jury in his closing argument: "The "Warren Court gave us our Miranda Rights...". I could not stop myself from interrupting him and saying: "Mr. _____I thought those Rights were given to us by God or are Natural Rights or birth rights as Americans, I wasn't aware that the "Warren Court" gave them to us, but you may continue with your argument". I was picking on him, but it does demonstrate a philosophy that has pervaded at least two generations of law school graduates and has been harmful to this country, in my humble opinion.
Be prepared to be surprised, such as being cited to the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which bears an amazing resemblance to portions of our Bill of Rights, such as this: "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" Sound like our 8th Amendment? The quote is from the English Bill of Right of 1689.
I have addressed this toward law students and lawyers, but it is a great but for anyone who loves history, government, politics or cares about the future of this country.
I have purchased at least 15 copies and given them to law students, judges, lawyers, and college students.
Joseph S. Johnston
Circuit Judge
13th Judicial Circuit, State of Alabama
Mobile, Alabama
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the authors
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
There is a newer edition of this item:
The Heritage Guide to the Constitution: Fully Revised Second Edition
$28.00
(376)
Only 19 left in stock - order soon.
$28.00
(376)
Only 19 left in stock - order soon.
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together
$14.44
Get it Nov 15 - 16
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Reviews with images
Submit a report
A few common reasons customers report reviews:
- Harassment, profanity
- Spam, advertisement, promotions
- Given in exchange for cash, discounts
When we get your report, we'll check if the review meets our Community guidelines. If it doesn't, we'll remove it.
Sorry, there was an error
Please try again later.Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on November 3, 2012
Reviewed in the United States on June 6, 2016
If you are a left-winger, you will not like this book. If you are a strict constitutionalist, you will get something from it, but will probably not love it to death. If you are a fan of the politics of people like George W. Bush and his administration, you'll probably like the book a lot. But regardless of your own philosophy, this book is worth having in your library.
The book was written to provide only a brief overview of each clause of the Constitution - supposedly representing the viewpoints of the original Founders. It is an ambitious effort. Though the Constitution is a relatively short document, addressing each point in it, even briefly, is a huge task - which is why this 475 page hardcover book is so big. It looks and feels like a dry college textbook with few photos... not the kind of light reading that one would engage in just for the fun of it. This is a resource book.
The main criticism I have is how the book purports to represent the mind and intent of the Founders. I don't believe that it does. The book is strongly federalist, whereas a good number of the Founders were anti-federalists (I consider myself anti-federalist as well). If any single Founding Father could be credited with this book, I would probably ascribe it to Alexander Hamilton. If you know your Founding Fathers, you'll understand what I mean.
But I'm glad I have the book and I'm sure I'll turn to it frequently. Only an ignorant person shields himself from the "dangers" of contrary opinions. There is much to be gained by considering a wide range of opinions and interpretations regarding the US Constitution.
Helpful Resource on the US Constitution - Largely from NeoConservative Perpectives
Reviewed in the United States on June 6, 2016
This is a good book to have as a resource when studying the US Constitution. For sure, the book was written with a certain philosophical "flavor". The people that put it together would classify it as "libertarian". However, in skimming through it and reading a little bit here and there I can definitely see neoconservative philosophy as well. In fact, I would say that the over-arching perspective of the writing is neoconservative in nature.Reviewed in the United States on June 6, 2016
If you are a left-winger, you will not like this book. If you are a strict constitutionalist, you will get something from it, but will probably not love it to death. If you are a fan of the politics of people like George W. Bush and his administration, you'll probably like the book a lot. But regardless of your own philosophy, this book is worth having in your library.
The book was written to provide only a brief overview of each clause of the Constitution - supposedly representing the viewpoints of the original Founders. It is an ambitious effort. Though the Constitution is a relatively short document, addressing each point in it, even briefly, is a huge task - which is why this 475 page hardcover book is so big. It looks and feels like a dry college textbook with few photos... not the kind of light reading that one would engage in just for the fun of it. This is a resource book.
The main criticism I have is how the book purports to represent the mind and intent of the Founders. I don't believe that it does. The book is strongly federalist, whereas a good number of the Founders were anti-federalists (I consider myself anti-federalist as well). If any single Founding Father could be credited with this book, I would probably ascribe it to Alexander Hamilton. If you know your Founding Fathers, you'll understand what I mean.
But I'm glad I have the book and I'm sure I'll turn to it frequently. Only an ignorant person shields himself from the "dangers" of contrary opinions. There is much to be gained by considering a wide range of opinions and interpretations regarding the US Constitution.
Images in this review
