Rating: 
Summary: Interesting start...but falls short of expectations
Review: : To explain and detail numerous landmark cases in the history of the Supreme Court. To indicate that both international and domestic events, and the views of individual justices have played a role in important Court decisions.
A. International situations can affect domestic Court decisions.
1. This phenomenon can be seen in the decisions in Hirabayashi v. United States and Korematsu v. United States. "Events in the larger world also found their way into this Court's docket..."(p.143) The December 7th bombing of Pearl Harbor not only brought these cases to the Supreme Court, but affected the outcomes of the cases. In Hirabayashi and Korematsu the Court justices declared that the United States had the rights to set curfews on people of a certain race, and that "because we are at war..."(p.145) that Korematsu could be relocated based on his ethnicity. Although the United States was involved in WWII, no battles were ever fought on the mainland of the United States. Regardless of this fact, thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living on the West coast were sent to relocation camps. This international war, and the battles raging thousands of miles away, affected the lives of these people. The fear of the Japanese in the United States influenced the justices' decisions to uphold the legality of curfews and relocation camps in the United States.B. Justices can be influenced by their personal beliefs, or the views of others.
1. At the time of the Dred Scott v. Sanford decision (1857), the majority of Supreme Court justices were from slave-holding states. Based on their ruling that slaves were not citizens with the right to sue, Rehnquist concludes that these justices might have brought their personal beliefs on slavery when making this decision. While the House of Representatives was dominated by northerners, the Supreme Court was the complete opposite. Rehnquist also reveals that justice Carlton used his connections with president Buchanan to help bring justice Grier to the majority view on the Constitutional validity of the Missouri compromise (p.60) Although Roosevelt's court-packing plan was not passed, the president still managed to appoint several justices over his 4 terms. As with other presidents, many justices tend to support the views of the president who puts them up for the position. (p.123-130) C. The decision made in Marbury v. Madison and Chief Justice John Marshall has had a lasting impact of the Supreme Court and its decisions.
1. According to Rehnquist " One need only understand a few of its cases to understand the Supreme Court's role in out nation's history...the case of Marbury v. Madison"(p.21) Chief Justice Marshall ruling in the case established the Court's power of judicial review, the ability to declare an act of congress unconstitutional. Rehnquist says that Marshall's decision has "remained the linchpin of our constitutional law ever since Marbury v. Madison was handed down"(p.35). Without this ruling, the first major ruling given out by the Court, many of the rights we have today may not exist. With out judicial review, or the power and stature given to the Court in the process, schools may still be segregated, abortions may still be illegal and one would never hear " You have the right to remain silent..." John Marshall, often referred to as the Great Chief Justice, set the bar for all following justices, and Rehnquist says often that he hopes to do what Marshall did for the Supreme Court.
A. The author's thesis cannot be argued. Every person on the Supreme Court does bring some bias or opinion to each decision. To think that a world war or major national strike will not affect court decisions would be irrational. The judges do not and cannot, live in a vacuum. The first court justices were required to work part of the year in the area that they represented, thus making it impossible for the justices to live lives secluded from the rest of the world and their opinions. On may argue the extent to which personal bias plays a role, and Rehnquist does not say how much it affects a justice's decision, yet he acknowledges that it exists. Marshall, the first Chief justice, unless you count John Jay, let a distinguishable mark on the Supreme Court, and no law student, or high school student studies history without examining his contribution to the Supreme Court.
B. Would I recommend this book? No. I would not recommend it. Although it gives lots of information and details about many important cases, it never goes into too much depth about individual cases. Instead the author skips around from justices, to cases, to world events, never keeping the reader very interested. The first parts of the book, when discussing his experiences as a law clerk, are the most appealing parts. To me that would be a book worth reading, not his views on the history of the Court. The last third, dealing with the day to day operation of the Court, the way cases are chosen, and how decisions are made, was also revealing. However the dry, factual information that made up most of the book far outweighs the few interesting anecdotes.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting start...but falls short of expectations
Review: : To explain and detail numerous landmark cases in the history of the Supreme Court. To indicate that both international and domestic events, and the views of individual justices have played a role in important Court decisions.
A. International situations can affect domestic Court decisions.
1. This phenomenon can be seen in the decisions in Hirabayashi v. United States and Korematsu v. United States. "Events in the larger world also found their way into this Court's docket..."(p.143) The December 7th bombing of Pearl Harbor not only brought these cases to the Supreme Court, but affected the outcomes of the cases. In Hirabayashi and Korematsu the Court justices declared that the United States had the rights to set curfews on people of a certain race, and that "because we are at war..."(p.145) that Korematsu could be relocated based on his ethnicity. Although the United States was involved in WWII, no battles were ever fought on the mainland of the United States. Regardless of this fact, thousands of Japanese and Japanese-Americans living on the West coast were sent to relocation camps. This international war, and the battles raging thousands of miles away, affected the lives of these people. The fear of the Japanese in the United States influenced the justices' decisions to uphold the legality of curfews and relocation camps in the United States. B. Justices can be influenced by their personal beliefs, or the views of others.
1. At the time of the Dred Scott v. Sanford decision (1857), the majority of Supreme Court justices were from slave-holding states. Based on their ruling that slaves were not citizens with the right to sue, Rehnquist concludes that these justices might have brought their personal beliefs on slavery when making this decision. While the House of Representatives was dominated by northerners, the Supreme Court was the complete opposite. Rehnquist also reveals that justice Carlton used his connections with president Buchanan to help bring justice Grier to the majority view on the Constitutional validity of the Missouri compromise (p.60) Although Roosevelt's court-packing plan was not passed, the president still managed to appoint several justices over his 4 terms. As with other presidents, many justices tend to support the views of the president who puts them up for the position. (p.123-130) C. The decision made in Marbury v. Madison and Chief Justice John Marshall has had a lasting impact of the Supreme Court and its decisions.
1. According to Rehnquist " One need only understand a few of its cases to understand the Supreme Court's role in out nation's history...the case of Marbury v. Madison"(p.21) Chief Justice Marshall ruling in the case established the Court's power of judicial review, the ability to declare an act of congress unconstitutional. Rehnquist says that Marshall's decision has "remained the linchpin of our constitutional law ever since Marbury v. Madison was handed down"(p.35). Without this ruling, the first major ruling given out by the Court, many of the rights we have today may not exist. With out judicial review, or the power and stature given to the Court in the process, schools may still be segregated, abortions may still be illegal and one would never hear " You have the right to remain silent..." John Marshall, often referred to as the Great Chief Justice, set the bar for all following justices, and Rehnquist says often that he hopes to do what Marshall did for the Supreme Court.
A. The author's thesis cannot be argued. Every person on the Supreme Court does bring some bias or opinion to each decision. To think that a world war or major national strike will not affect court decisions would be irrational. The judges do not and cannot, live in a vacuum. The first court justices were required to work part of the year in the area that they represented, thus making it impossible for the justices to live lives secluded from the rest of the world and their opinions. On may argue the extent to which personal bias plays a role, and Rehnquist does not say how much it affects a justice's decision, yet he acknowledges that it exists. Marshall, the first Chief justice, unless you count John Jay, let a distinguishable mark on the Supreme Court, and no law student, or high school student studies history without examining his contribution to the Supreme Court.
B. Would I recommend this book? No. I would not recommend it. Although it gives lots of information and details about many important cases, it never goes into too much depth about individual cases. Instead the author skips around from justices, to cases, to world events, never keeping the reader very interested. The first parts of the book, when discussing his experiences as a law clerk, are the most appealing parts. To me that would be a book worth reading, not his views on the history of the Court. The last third, dealing with the day to day operation of the Court, the way cases are chosen, and how decisions are made, was also revealing. However the dry, factual information that made up most of the book far outweighs the few interesting anecdotes.
Rating: 
Summary: A Superb Guide to Understanding the Supreme Court
Review: As an entering college student, I had to find some way to keep my intellect in good working order over the summer, so I decided to read The Supreme Court by William H. Rehnquist. At first, I was concerned that the rhetoric and structure of the work would be complicated, thus making the concepts difficult to comprehend. Thankfully, Rhenquist caters to his audience of Supreme Court novices, presenting a fathomable, erudite sequence of events beginning with the Marshall Court and ending with his very own. While I knew the names and dates of most of the important Supreme Court rulings and the general premise of each case, Chief Justice Rhenquist masterfully and succinctly recalls the names, events, and other miscellaneous particulars of each ruling. For example, Marbury VS. Madison became more than just the case decided in 1803 that bestowed upon the court the power of Judicial Review. The processes, jurisdiction, and problems of the court are also explained in general terms coupled with specific examples and circumstances. In summation, the work is a beneficial blend of history and theory and an excellent read for anyone interested in Constitutional Law or the intricacies of the United State's legal system.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent short history of the court
Review: As an introduction to the history of the Supreme Court, Justice Rehnquist's book was just what I was looking for. Not only does he give a good explanation of the personalities and issues through the ages, he also explains the experience of being a clerk on the court. Rehnquist begins by telling the story of how he came to be a clerk for Justice Jackson in the early 1950s. He then goes back and explains the origins of the court in the 19th century. From 1800 until the Civil War, only two men were chief Justice, John Marshall and Roger Taney. Rehnquist explains why both of these men were important and how they shaped the court for generations to come. Rehnquist then explains that the next 100 years were without an important chief justice, but many significant associate justices. This period begins with cases like Plessy v. Ferguson and ends with Brown versus the Board of Education. Rehnquist does a good job of explaining the politics behind FDR's court packing plan in the 1930s, and the Steel Case that came before the court when he was a clerk in the early 1950s. The book ends with how the process of deciding cases happens on the Supreme Court, and how Rehnquist's experience was different as an associate justice before he became the chief. The book works as an excellent history and an insider's view to how the court operates. It's not an in-depth book, but I don't know a single volume could accomplish that. I was very happy with what I learned in 300 pages.
Rating:
Summary: Well done - except for some bias
Review: Chief Justice Rehnquist authors a very interesting and informative history of the Supreme Court. However, in the later chapters Justice Rehnquist lets some of his personal slants on issues (and other Justices) tailor some of his views in some unfortunate ways. Overall, however, a very good book.
Rating:
Summary: Combination of Personal Reflection & History
Review: Chief Justice Rehnquist describes what it was like during the "dues paying" stage of his career and in so doing talks about the history of the Supreme Court. He's an intriguing storyteller and this book is a nice balance between the personal and the historical. By the nature of the writing one can pick up a sense of his judicial philosophy, in fact he writes about the work of the court, "the individuals who comprise the Court at any particular time have a great deal to say about the kind of decisions that the Court makes." In terms of judicial philosophy and the role the constitution assigns the third branch of government, one should take from this book an observation about that topic if one takes nothing else: "During the Constitutional Convention in 1787 it was proposed that the Supreme Court be granted a power to 'revise' laws passed by Congress, but the convention rejected this proposal. Justices of the Supreme Court have a great deal of authority, but it is not an authority to weave into the Constitution their own ideas of what is good and what is bad." I recommend this book. It is good reading and it provides historical insight from a personal viewpoint.
Rating:
Summary: Combination of Personal Reflection & History
Review: Chief Justice Rehnquist describes what it was like during the "dues paying" stage of his career and in so doing talks about the history of the Supreme Court. He's an intriguing storyteller and this book is a nice balance between the personal and the historical. By the nature of the writing one can pick up a sense of his judicial philosophy, in fact he writes about the work of the court, "the individuals who comprise the Court at any particular time have a great deal to say about the kind of decisions that the Court makes." In terms of judicial philosophy and the role the constitution assigns the third branch of government, one should take from this book an observation about that topic if one takes nothing else: "During the Constitutional Convention in 1787 it was proposed that the Supreme Court be granted a power to 'revise' laws passed by Congress, but the convention rejected this proposal. Justices of the Supreme Court have a great deal of authority, but it is not an authority to weave into the Constitution their own ideas of what is good and what is bad." I recommend this book. It is good reading and it provides historical insight from a personal viewpoint.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Primer on Institution & Jurisprudence of the Supremes
Review: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has recently revised and expanded his book on the history and operation of the US Supreme Court. The book comes in at around three hundred pages, and is accessible to a general reading audience. Yet, those trained in political science and the law can also benefit from this work, as it provides a nice overview of Supreme Court history and how the justices operate today. In terms of history, the Chief Justice's book provides brief discussion spanning from the Marshall court in the early Nineteenth Century until then end of the Warren court in the latter part of the Twentieth Century. Again, this work remains light in terms of doctrinal analysis, giving the orthodox views of cases as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), and likewise giving standard, summary treatments to landmark cases like Lochner v. New York (1905) and the court's Commerce Clause cases. The Chief Justice does a fine job in framing the historical backdrop and context in which cases like Dred Scott and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) were decided, discussing the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska Act in setting up the former case and the Korean Conflict and labor disputes in the latter. Since the Chief Justice was himself a Supreme Court law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson during the Youngstown case (aka the "Steel Seizure Case"), his discussion of that case serves the twofold purpose of covering a significant decision in separation of powers jurisprudence and describing the work of a clerk. Justice Jackson also figures prominently in the Chief Justice's enjoyable summary of President Theodore Roosevelt's failed "Court Packing" plan, as the book covers the history behind the appointments of many of the justices. Being rather appreciative of Justice Jackson's career and Supreme Court opinions, I longed for a more intimate portrayal of the man by his former law clerk, but I nonetheless realize that this book is too short for that, and likewise too short to go into detail in a great many of the areas that were touched upon. But I did enjoy his short biographical overviews of many of the justices who have served on the high court, including Joseph Story and Stephen J. Field. For the most part, the Chief Justice gives a balanced look at the figures and cases of the court, but he does show his feelings about such cases as Korematsu v. US (1944) (an infamous Japanese internment case), as well as the Warren court's general approach to constitutional rights guarantees for criminal defendants. I found later chapters dealing with the Supreme Court's administrative operations less interesting than the history, and his brief descriptions of more recent and current members of the court something read like a tourist brochure. Understandably and wisely, the Chief Justice likewise declines to discuss the events surrounding his own appointments and confirmations as well as major cases that have come before the Supreme Court during his own time as an Associate Justice and Chief Justice. (For a treatment of more recent cases and development of constitutional jurisprudence I recommend Judge Kenneth W. Starr's "First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life.") This newer edition is now available in paperback and it receives my recommendation.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Primer on Institution & Jurisprudence of the Supremes
Review: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has recently revised and expanded his book on the history and operation of the US Supreme Court. The book comes in at around three hundred pages, and is accessible to a general reading audience. Yet, those trained in political science and the law can also benefit from this work, as it provides a nice overview of Supreme Court history and how the justices operate today. In terms of history, the Chief Justice's book provides brief discussion spanning from the Marshall court in the early Nineteenth Century until then end of the Warren court in the latter part of the Twentieth Century. Again, this work remains light in terms of doctrinal analysis, giving the orthodox views of cases as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), and likewise giving standard, summary treatments to landmark cases like Lochner v. New York (1905) and the court's Commerce Clause cases. The Chief Justice does a fine job in framing the historical backdrop and context in which cases like Dred Scott and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) were decided, discussing the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska Act in setting up the former case and the Korean Conflict and labor disputes in the latter. Since the Chief Justice was himself a Supreme Court law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson during the Youngstown case (aka the "Steel Seizure Case"), his discussion of that case serves the twofold purpose of covering a significant decision in separation of powers jurisprudence and describing the work of a clerk. Justice Jackson also figures prominently in the Chief Justice's enjoyable summary of President Theodore Roosevelt's failed "Court Packing" plan, as the book covers the history behind the appointments of many of the justices. Being rather appreciative of Justice Jackson's career and Supreme Court opinions, I longed for a more intimate portrayal of the man by his former law clerk, but I nonetheless realize that this book is too short for that, and likewise too short to go into detail in a great many of the areas that were touched upon. But I did enjoy his short biographical overviews of many of the justices who have served on the high court, including Joseph Story and Stephen J. Field. For the most part, the Chief Justice gives a balanced look at the figures and cases of the court, but he does show his feelings about such cases as Korematsu v. US (1944) (an infamous Japanese internment case), as well as the Warren court's general approach to constitutional rights guarantees for criminal defendants. I found later chapters dealing with the Supreme Court's administrative operations less interesting than the history, and his brief descriptions of more recent and current members of the court something read like a tourist brochure. Understandably and wisely, the Chief Justice likewise declines to discuss the events surrounding his own appointments and confirmations as well as major cases that have come before the Supreme Court during his own time as an Associate Justice and Chief Justice. (For a treatment of more recent cases and development of constitutional jurisprudence I recommend Judge Kenneth W. Starr's "First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life.") This newer edition is now available in paperback and it receives my recommendation.
Rating: 
Summary: A Thoughtful Introduction to the Nation's Highest Court.
Review: Chief Justice William Rehnquist presents an impressively well-written introduction to the history and the operations of the United States Supreme Court. Beginning with the landmark case, Marbury v. Madison, Rehnquist guides the reader through a history of the Supreme Court, its notable Justices, and important cases. He traces this history through the court of Cheif Justice Earl Warren, the last Chief Justice with whom Rehnquist did not sit on the Court. Rehnquist also sheds light on the inner workings of the Court. Topics covered include how the Court chooses which cases it will hear, what happens in the conference after the oral arguments are heard, and how opinions are written. For someone on the outside, this is perhaps the best glimpse into the most secretive of our three branches of government. Chief Justice Rehnquist's book will astound all readers who bear even the least interest in highest court in the land through his deft handling and description of each of the topics he discusses.
| 
