Other Sellers on Amazon
FREE Shipping
85% positive
& FREE Shipping
97% positive over last 12 months
+ $3.99 shipping
91% positive over last 12 months
Usually ships within 4 to 5 days.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession with Rights Is Tearing America Apart Hardcover – March 16, 2021
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
|
Audio CD, Audiobook, MP3 Audio, Unabridged
"Please retry" | $25.99 | — |
Enhance your purchase
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PUBLISHERS PROSE AWARD FINALIST | “Essential and fresh and vital . . . It is the argument of this important book that until Americans can reimagine rights, there is no path forward, and there is, especially, no way to get race right. No peace, no justice.”—from the foreword by Jill Lepore, New York Times best-selling author of These Truths: A History of the United States
An eminent constitutional scholar reveals how our approach to rights is dividing America, and shows how we can build a better system of justice.
You have the right to remain silent—and the right to free speech. The right to worship, and to doubt. The right to be free from discrimination, and to hate. The right to life, and the right to own a gun.
Rights are a sacred part of American identity. Yet they also are the source of some of our greatest divisions. We believe that holding a right means getting a judge to let us do whatever the right protects. And judges, for their part, seem unable to imagine two rights coexisting—reducing the law to winners and losers. The resulting system of legal absolutism distorts our law, debases our politics, and exacerbates our differences rather than helping to bridge them.
As renowned legal scholar Jamal Greene argues, we need a different approach—and in How Rights Went Wrong, he proposes one that the Founders would have approved. They preferred to leave rights to legislatures and juries, not judges, he explains. Only because of the Founders’ original sin of racial discrimination—and subsequent missteps by the Supreme Court—did courts gain such outsized power over Americans’ rights. In this paradigm-shifting account, Greene forces readers to rethink the relationship between constitutional law and political dysfunction and shows how we can recover America’s original vision of rights, while updating them to confront the challenges of the twenty-first century.
- Print length368 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherMariner Books
- Publication dateMarch 16, 2021
- Dimensions6 x 1.15 x 9 inches
- ISBN-101328518116
- ISBN-13978-1328518118
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
“Essential and fresh and vital . . . It is the argument of this important book that until Americans can reimagine rights, there is no path forward, and there is, especially, no way to get race right. No peace, no justice.”—from the foreword by Jill Lepore, New York Times best-selling author of These Truths: A History of the United States “When Americans talk about rights, we think in absolutist terms: my right prohibits or preempts your action. But as Jamal Greene observes in this deftly argued book, that notion betrays how our rights were originally conceived. Paying special attention to the issues that most vex us, Greene offers an attractive alternative to one of the most troubling aspects of our constitutional jurisprudence.”—Jack Rakove, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution “Fastidiously researched and immensely readable, How Rights Went Wrong offers important strategies for advancing human rights in an era when the Supreme Court cannot be counted on to do so. Jamal Greene has written a superb, important book—and a well-timed one, in its plea that we not vest so much power in courts, and that we secure fundamental rights through the political process rather than through constitutional litigation.”—Nadine Strossen, past president, American Civil Liberties Union “A provocative argument for more humility and listening, and less arrogance and dogmatism. Greene urges that we litigate too much and discuss too little—and that ‘rightsism’ is the problem. Perfectly timed and passionately presented, his argument deserves widespread attention.”—Cass R. Sunstein, author of How Change Happens “Greene delves deeply into the legal, cultural, and political matters behind rights conflicts, and laces his account with feisty legal opinions and colorful character sketches. This incisive account persuades.”—Publishers Weekly —
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : Mariner Books (March 16, 2021)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 368 pages
- ISBN-10 : 1328518116
- ISBN-13 : 978-1328518118
- Item Weight : 1.17 pounds
- Dimensions : 6 x 1.15 x 9 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #506,332 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #152 in Civil Rights Law (Books)
- #479 in General Constitutional Law
- #976 in Civil Rights & Liberties (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviewed in the United States on April 7, 2021
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on April 7, 2021
Columbia University constitutional law professor Jamal Greene thinks the American tradition frames rights incorrectly. Our rights regime entrusts rights enforcement to judges, not legislatures, and construes rights as a zero-sum equation. Instead, Greene suggests, we should frame rights as relative and situational, not absolute, and the solution as arbitration, not enforcement. Greene’s argument is definitely not simple, but is at least intriguing.
Constitutional rights seem immutable: our Bill of Rights is, as the NRA and ACLU assert, pretty transparent. Not so, says Greene. Our conception of who holds rights, and how, has evolved through history. The rights inscribed were held collectively, not individually. But the Founders’ definition proved unsatisfactory and led directly to the Civil War. Since then, Reconstruction, two World Wars, and the Civil Rights Movement forced further reevaluations.
Americans historically demand rights by a combination of public protest and court challenge. Several rights cases remain historic: Brown vs. BOE, for instance, or Roe vs. Wade. But these cases create or reify rights by appeals to absolute truth. Greene makes hay extensively over abortion rights, noting that in codifying a woman’s right to control her reproductive choices, the court nullified embryonic rights: since both cannot be absolute, one must be negated.
Greene contrasts this with Germany, which faced an abortion rights challenge approximately simultaneously with the United States. Rather than seeing rights as absolute, Germany saw reproductive rights and embryonic rights as positional, and sought to mitigate them. (Greene uses the word “mitigate” often, sometimes in a confusing technical sense.) Notably, as America’s abortion rights debate has become increasingly violent, Germany has remained remarkably calm.
This, Greene says, is only one outcome of American-style rights. When every case is a question of absolutes, it encourages litigants to paper over their common ground and paint the other side in the worst possible light. Every Supreme Court case becomes, not an opportunity to see each suit on its own terms, but an existential crisis dividing America’s power base into winners and losers. We stop seeing others as human.
Worse, every case becomes a slippery slope. America remains one of Earth’s few democracies that doesn’t consider food a right, versus, say, weapons. Courts historically fear granting some rights will lead to ballooning demands, and therefore courts, even nominally progressive ones, remain reluctant to redress demonstrable harm. Notwithstanding the occasional celebrated rights win, our absolutist vision of rights makes courts generally timid.
Greene’s prose is dense, but not impenetrable, and sometimes his illustrations need some solemn contemplation. He regularly contrasts American judicial precedent with international courts, mostly European, to demonstrate how different traditions see rights. A certain variety of American conservative might dislike this: the hard right often hates subjecting America to global standards, But an international eye shows that circumstances aren’t inevitable, in court or in life.
I enjoyed Greene’s explication of American case law, though I sometimes needed to read his illustrations more than once to grasp their import. Greene tries to strike a difficult balance, writing for generalist audiences, without condescending to them. Sometimes he errs on the side of being too erudite, not explaining sufficiently for non-lawyers. To his credit, he avoids jargon, so his writing is frequently complex, but never opaque.
Further, Greene does something I’ve seen too infrequently. He has three lengthy chapters on how absolutist thinking obscures important questions for certain population groups. This includes a detailed chapter on disability rights, a field often neglected behind more photogenic race and gender rights. As someone who’s recently become conscious of how pervasive ableism remains, I appreciate this contribution to an often-overlooked debate.
Greene’s position will ruffle many feathers. Rights discussions have loomed large in controversies where America has made improvements, and reframing rights will mean re-litigating several important civil rights victories. But if Greene’s right, that isn’t entirely awful; we’ve missed several opportunities for more nuanced solutions because our love of moral absolutes has clouded our vision.
No solution is perfect, Greene admits, and he doesn’t have every answer. But he attempts to present a better viewpoint for finding those answers, one which escapes absolute moralism. This book won’t solve everything, but hopefully it’ll advance the debate.
“How Rights Went Wrong” was enlightening, providing insight on how court decisions are made and the history that led to this point. It’s a criticism of the process, not the people or the sides. The idea that the judicial role should be to mediate complex issues and force opposing sides into discussion sounds so obvious on the surface, yet it is not what happens. Instead, judges have created a winner-take-all approach, discouraging politicians from even pretending to work out differences. A fascinating and educational read.










