|
| Scalia Dissents: Writings of the Supreme Court's Wittiest, Most Outspoken Justice | 
 enlarge | Author: Kevin A. Ring
Publisher: Regnery Publishing, Inc.
Category: Book
List Price: $27.95
Buy Used: $9.84
You Save: $18.11 (65%)
New (13) Used (20) Collectible (2) from $9.84
Avg. Customer Rating:  17 reviews
Sales Rank: 20338
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 256
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.2
Dimensions (in): 9 x 5.7 x 1.4
ISBN: 0895260530
Dewey Decimal Number: 348.7326
EAN: 9780895260536
ASIN: 0895260530
Publication Date: November 25, 2004
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: Used - Good
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Attorney Kevin Ring has assembled Justice Antonin Scalia's most scathing, most poignant, and most accessible opinions to date. Specific rulings and speeches are explained as Ring invites readers into the judicial world.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 12 more reviews...
 Best Book on Judicial Review April 24, 2005
36 out of 50 found this review helpful
This is a wonderfully written book. I haven't come across any writer who better explains the issues and Scalia's jurisprudence than Ring, including Scalia himself.
In the first chapter, Ring clearly and crisply summarizes Scalia's interpretive methodology. The rest of the book is divided into various topics, such as separation of powers, abortion, race, religion, etc. Ring briefly explains the issues of selected cases in each topic, followed by excerpts from Scalia's (generally dissenting) opinions.
Ring's greatest achievement is avoiding polemics entirely. This is emphatically not just a book for conservatives. It's just as much for liberals who actually believe in democracy. Ring keeps his eye on the ball by emphasizing that the central issue is separation of powers (a judicial issue), not whether a policy result is good or bad (a legislative issue). In Scalia's view, separation of powers is even more important than the bill of rights in securing our liberties. Congress cannot usurp executive or judicial powers, the President cannot usurp legislative or judicial powers, and the Supreme Court cannot usurp legislative or executive powers.
Scalia's position on Constitutional rights is very simple. If the text of the Constitution does not explicitly protect the right and there was no tradition of protecting the right when the Constitution was ratified, it is not Constitutionally protected and that's the end of the analysis. If the right is to be protected, it's up to the elected members of Congress or the state legislatures, not five unelected life tenured lawyers. Any other methodology, such as one founded on the "living" Constitution or "evolving standards of decency," is nothing more than a legislative power grab. As Scalia often points out, how can an appointed committee of lawyers be better equipped to determine society's evolving standards of decency than legislators elected by that society?
Abortion is a concrete example. It's not mentioned in the text of the Constitution and there was no tradition of protecting it when the Constitution was ratified. In fact, abortion was prohibited for two hundred years after ratification. So abortion cannot be a Constitutional right and its proponents are left to the democratic process.
Instead, a majority of lawyers on the Court usurped the power to legislate on abortion. Demonstrations for and against abortion are now on the steps of the Court, instead of the state legislatures. Confirmation of Supreme Court justices has become a throughly political process. The focus is now on the political views of the nominee, not his or her judicial qualifications. All of this, of course, is to be expected from the Court's encroachment into the lawmaking power. The lawyers on the Court have become abortion referees deciding whether state laws place an "undue burden" (whatever that means) on the "right" to abortion.
Scalia's prose can be a little dense, but his logical brilliance and wit definitely come through. He is in turn sardonic and sad at how far the Court's jurisprudence has come from that envisioned by the framers. He is meticulous in deconstructing the majority's ludicrous rationales and prophetic in describing the harmful results. Scalia's most impressive opinion is perhaps his 1989 dissent on the independent counsel statute, a case in which the majority permitted legislative encroachment into the executive power. He correctly predicted the harmful results of the opinion, as the supporters of Bush I and Clinton both learned by experience.
One can only hope Scalia's defense of separation of powers will win out in the end, but it's hard to be optimistic at this point.
Scalia at his best October 26, 2004
35 out of 41 found this review helpful
This is an excellent book that makes a very difficult subject, the United States Constitution and an even more controversial Supreme Court Justice, Scalia, easy to read and understand. Ring has taken selected issues and presented them at three levels: The first level, the issue itself i.e. Abortion or Free Speech etc. and is his own words describes the issue. At the second level he has taken the specific case that relates to the issues and explains, in plain easy to understand language, the essence of the particular case. Finally he lets Scalia speak for himself with the actual text of Scalia's opinions written for the specific decision. You do not have to be a Constitutional Scholar to gain an understanding of the issues, the Supreme Court cases or Scalia's decisions. Actually Ring makes it fun to read about the law of the land. A must read for students of the U.S. Constitution.
Great book! October 7, 2005
26 out of 40 found this review helpful
During his tenure on the United States Supreme Court, Justice Scalia has led a continuous assault on judicial tinkering. The rule of law, he has argued, demands that we be bound by the text of the law-not by evolving social standards, not even by some elusive authorial intent, but by the actual words of the Constitution and of the statutes passed by state and federal legislatures.
Scalia has articulated this textualist philosophy in his frequent public lectures, in his penetrating book A Matter of Interpretation, and in his many Supreme Court opinions. In Scalia Dissents: Writings of the Supreme Court's Wittiest, Most Outspoken Justice, attorney Kevin A. Ring collects some of the most memorable of these opinions. The stated aim of this volume is to bring to a wider audience "some of the most noteworthy, colorful, and entertaining opinions ever written by a United States Supreme Court Justice." More important, the collection traces the development of Scalia's view-derided by progressive law professors and controversial even among conservatives-that, in Ring's words, "laws-and especially that supreme law known as the Constitution of the United States-say what they mean and mean what they say."
Over the past twenty years, perhaps the happiest outcome of the Court's many miserable decisions is that they provide Scalia with occasions for writing opinions that are both persuasive and entertaining. This book contains many. This well-organized volume gives readers not only an introduction to Scalia's thought but a guided tour through the difficult issues the Supreme Court has addressed in recent years. Read together, Scalia's opinions are a bracing antidote to the legal opportunism that has infected many of the Court's recent decisions. They are also a troubling reminder that the infection continues to spread.
Monty Rainey
www.juntosociety.com
Great Read, Very Informative October 14, 2004
21 out of 23 found this review helpful
Despite your political affiliation, this book captures the essence of Scalia's opinion and biting wit. While the prospect of reading a collection of legal rulings seems like a sure fire way to defeat insomnia, Scalia Dissents surprises by enlightening the reader on the issue and how Scalia interprets each with flair. Ring's choice of Scalia's opinions is excellent and his summary of the issues at hand makes the text accessible to all. Big thumbs up!
Scalia and Ring rock! November 4, 2004
21 out of 29 found this review helpful
This guy knows how to write! I just got this book as a gift, and it's hard to put down. Hard to believe this is Ring's first book. Don't know where he learned to write, but he's pithy, informative, and fun. Scalia rocks -- I couldn't imagine finding the Supreme Court interesting, but Scalia's opinions are witty and throught-provoking. The book kind of reminds me of Bennett's Book of Virtues, but from the view of a Supreme Court jurist. Two thumbs up!
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
