Rating: 
Summary: A little disappointing, but on whole a good book
Review: This book is sketchy on the details of the history of judicial activism, focusing more on recent outrages in the United States, Canada, and Israel. Furthermore, it is clear the publisher is indeed THE publishing arm of the think-tank Robert Bork is a fellow at. Clear because it contains some arcane language and argumentation that only a person initiated into the higher eschelons of the legal profession could hope to understand. A mass-market publisher would probably not let the arcane language remain. Therefore, those seeking a basic and introductory work into the phenomenoh of judicial activism might wish to pass this volume by, for now. But for those seeking some red meat, or not afraid to start off in the deep end, this is a good book. Exactly what will you find in this book? A nice introduction and rough outline of the history of judicial activism, and then a satisfactorily thorough examination of judicial activism in the countries mentioned above, within the last thirty years. Also, Bork does a good job of explaining the rise of so- called "international constitutional common law". This last part (though it comes first in the book) is indispensable reading for any American concerned with preserving the American way of life and his own personal freedom. There you will read about an important international court that asserts that they have authority over you and every other human being on the planet. One final "word to the wise". This book, minus the notes and index is only 139 pages long.
Rating: 
Summary: Bork Speaks for Freedom
Review: This is a very important book. In it you will find exposed the horrendous harm that activist judges have imposed and continue to impose on our free Republic. Those errant judges, Bork reveals, are legislating from the bench, enforcing a new ideology that he named "lifestyle socialism." Bork calls those judges faux intellectuals of the Left who, unable to persuade the people or the legislatures, "avoid the verdict of the ballot box" by engaging in "politics masquerading as law." This is in violation of the U.S. government's "Separation of Powers" rule. We are "increasingly governed not by law or elected representatives, but by unelected, unrepresentative, unaccountable committees of lawyers applying no law other than their own will." Bork shows how our Republic has been assaulted by a "coup d'etat" by men and women in black robes who have changed us "from the rule of law to the rule of judges." Bork says the activist judges see their mission, not as upholding our Constitution, but as redefining it to coerce new behaviors on what they consider "a barbarian majority motivated by bigotry, racism, sexism, xenophobia, irrational sexual morality, and the like." He shows how this group of federal judges is hellbent on destroying traditional values in the United States Republic. Some of them "make it up" as they go along, rationalizing opinions that suit their own ideas of what is right and wrong--opinions that have nothing to do with the Constitution and statutes enacted by the Congress. Bloodless revolutions do not come only in military garb, and Bork exposes the bloodless revolution that is destroying the freedoms so many of us take for granted. For anyone who does not take their freedom for granted, this book is MUST-READ!!
Rating: 
Summary: Yes, out of control courts are a worry but...
Review: This review is going to feel dated fairly quickly fellow amazon readers. Forgive me. Remember a few weeks past when a Federal court said the "telemarketer no call list" was illegal and it intruded on free speech? Citizens everywhere were outraged and a few weeks later a higher court reversed the decision. The point is while the courts seem to invent laws even they know there may be limits. Now, in Britian it's said that Rooks (a crow like bird) hold court and pronounce death upon one another. That is how the international courts sound. Most are European, have some power, but mostly sit around and pronounce judgements upon one thing or another. However, these courts have a ring of a grade school class know-it-all. One day a tough kid at the school may punch his lights out. Judge Borks writes extensively upon a British court holding the ex-dictator of Chile for war crimes. I'm not going to debate this subject. However, what amazed me was Britian was willing to play a game with the judge and Chile took no military action dispite the fact they have a quite good navy. In America courts are ultimately backed up by the sheriff, police, Federal Marshalls, and the U.S.Army (next time look at a "National Guard" uniform, it says "U.S. Army"). However, these international courts have no enforcement powers other than sheer prouncements. Judge Bork fails to see that a democratic nation plays by the rule of law. One judge is seen just as legitimate as another. China, Cuba, and other nations would never tolerate an activist judge jailing one of their rulers. Lets say a Chinese ruler who could be connected to the 1989 killing of students was ordered arrested by one of these European judges while that ruler was in Europe. Does anybody think China will not do something nasty & mean to the judges? In a few weeks off the coast of the European nation a Chinese submarine would arrive and threats to that European court would be backed up by action. Chinese cruise missiles and European court rooms would not mix well. This observer of events was amazed that Chile didn't mount a commando raid to free the ex-dictator and a second raid to arrest the European judge. And that is ultimately the logical outcome of these activist courts. One day some nation with a backbone will push back hard against one of these judges. A simple commando raid, an arrest of a judge, and a few years in some third world dungeon will make some of the more pompous courts think twice. Basically, that is the ultimate end game of these international courts. They will push their power. Then some nation will take military action and the power of these courts will pass. Now, American courts are pushing their luck. However, sooner or later the culture wars will be over. Some state or a branch of government may tire of activist judges. The legislature has the power of the "purse". They could just order a 75% cut in funding of the courts. It's hard to be activist if you can't pay your light bills. Things can get even more draconian on the American courts. President Lincoln suspended Habeous corpus during the American Civil War. The SCOTUS demanded that Habeous corpus be reenstated. Lincoln ignored the order & debated having the SCOTUS jailed for the duration of the Civil War. Federal Marshals couldn't stand against the Union Army. That was sort of the problem of this whole book. Yes, there is rule of law. But rule of law is an agreement of people to abide by a common set of rules. If one side gets very unreasonable then - much like the uproar over the telemarketers - a backlash could occur. I view these days as the halcyon days of judicial activism. Our nation & world has never been so civilized. Terrorists and dictators do not follow rule-of-law. Sooner or later these courts will overstep their authority and will be put in their place by armed mem. This is a logical outcome. And at that point the American and Internatinal courts will be like the rooks of Britian: they will make pointless decisions that nobody will notice. Now, to the book itself. It gives good case law, good cause and effect, and wonderful examples of court cases. Judge Bork does a great job documentating the particular parties in a case and the issue of law. Even liberals and conservatives will like this book.
Rating:
Summary: Hottest issue in America today
Review: With a ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California outlawing our Pledge of Allegiance because it contains the words, "one nation under God," and the case of Lawrence v. Texas in which a constitutionally protected 'right' to sodomy was discovered, there couldn't be a more informative and timely book or a better author on the subject of law, precedent, and the role of the judiciary in America. Robert Bork presents factual evidence of worldwide judicial tyranny. While the 11th Circuit puts the 10 Commandments in the closet in Alabama and the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals finds that a 4-year-old had no right to give out pencils that said "Jesus loves the little children" as Easter presents to classmates, we must ask ourselves: are we ruled by Law or by Men? To quote the author from one interview, "The nations in the West are increasingly governed not by law or elected representatives, but by unelected, unrepresentative, unaccountable committees of lawyers applying the law in accordance with nothing other than their own will." How will you decide this issue of judicial activism? Will you champion various court decisions because they align with your worldview, despite the consequences to our unique constitutional form of government in America and the delicate balance of power and culture between nations? U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy cited *foreign* court rulings as a basis (in part) for his decision in Lawrence v. Texas, and Ruth Bater Ginsberg was later quoted affirming and defending that practice. The New York Times has reported openly and approvingly that judges are engaging in a "worldwide constitutional conversation."
Research through the pages of this book what in the world is going on with the judiciary. Become informed about why the unique foundations of American law and jurisprudence are vital to the freedoms we all hold dear and to civilization as we know it.
| 
