The Rehnquist Court and the Constitution

Rating:
Summary: excellent book
Review: i think if you go through this book you would realise justice is not blind but very racialy prejudiced i would prefer straight shooter brilliant jusice scalia,excellent book

Rating:
Summary: Subliminally Biased, but well researched
Review: In terms of informational content and comprehensiveness, this text is quite good. Yarbrough cites many sources and gives the essence of most of the opinions on the cases he covers. That is to say that a given case may have three or four opinions, as justices can agree on the same verdict for different reasons, and Yarbrough does a fine job of explaining each on most of the decisions covered. My huge qualm with the work is the simple fact that Yarbrough commits one of the biggest sins possible in scholarly work: he sharply biases his work without seeming to. His language is subtly biased, and an unwary reader could easily be manipulated.

Rating:
Summary: Good but not great
Review: In this work Tinsley Yarbrough seeks to summarize the work of the Rehnquist Court (up until 2000) concerning the seven dominate issues of constitutional adjudication. Yarbrough examines subjects such as governmental power, freedom of expression and religion, criminal justice, and unenumerated rights. Begining with a description of the appointments of the justices who conservatives hoped would finally kill the last remnants of the liberal Warren Court era, Yarbrough examines each of the most important issues and concludes that the Rehnquist Court has failed, at least generally, to achieve this hope. Instead, it has walked something of a more moderate role, sometimes limiting precedent but often reaffirming the core principles of the liberal activism of old.

The work is good but it should not be your first introduction to the Supreme Court. It is densely packed with information and is probably best for a reference work to use when you reach a new area of coursework. My biggest problem with Yarbrough's work here is that it is great at synthesizing the many cases of the Rehnquist era but it is light on meaningful analysis and criticism of those cases. Description only goes so far and I think the book would have benefited from a stronger analytical view of the 14 years (then) of the Rehnquist Court.

Rating:
Summary: excellent book
Review: Mr. Yarbrough has a fine reputation as a leading judicial biographer: his previous works on Hugo Black, and the two Justices Harlan were impressive, detailed and interesting. With "The Rehnquist Court" he pumps out a minor achievement and a heavily slanted analysis of recent Constitutional decisions. There's no denying the hostility toward conservative/strict-constructionist judges and viewpoints and this, as a previous poster noted, deeply taints the work overall. In addition, Yarbrough's style (which has always tended to the dry and tedious) is here especially mind-numbing: the interesting constitutional issues under debate are hidden amongst irrelevant facts and long-winded prose. As a whole, I found the book very disappointing and the steep price tag wholly unwarranted.

Rating:
Summary: Unfortunate addition to Yarbrough's resume
Review: Mr. Yarbrough has a fine reputation as a leading judicial biographer: his previous works on Hugo Black, and the two Justices Harlan were impressive, detailed and interesting. With "The Rehnquist Court" he pumps out a minor achievement and a heavily slanted analysis of recent Constitutional decisions. There's no denying the hostility toward conservative/strict-constructionist judges and viewpoints and this, as a previous poster noted, deeply taints the work overall. In addition, Yarbrough's style (which has always tended to the dry and tedious) is here especially mind-numbing: the interesting constitutional issues under debate are hidden amongst irrelevant facts and long-winded prose. As a whole, I found the book very disappointing and the steep price tag wholly unwarranted.

Rating:
Summary: Well written peek behind the Supreme Court bench
Review: The Rehnquist Court and the Constitution is not light reading, but for those who are interested in the high court, it is good reading. Yarbrough provides a concise examination of each Justice, including his or her background, confirmation hearing, and the political climate of that hearing. He captures the essence of each Justice as both jurist and human being. He then allows the reader to infer the interaction of those philosophies, personalities and egos on the direction that he perceives for significant constitutional issues. He does this without much, if any, editorial comment, though at times his own constitutional philosophy appears to peek out just a bit. Although this book is a bit heavy for anyone other than a constitutional scholar, it is well worth reading. Any student, teacher, judge, lawyer or just plain "court watcher" will appreciate this glimpse into the most secret and perhaps most powerful branch of our government.