The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America

Good series on the CourtI've used parts for an AP Gov class I teach

The larger point of this book is interesting and convincing. That collegiality and consensus-building may be more important traits than sheer intellect in determining long-term influence is a thesis that has legs.This book falters in a few ways though. First, Rosen seems to have an axe to grind with certain justices. His characterizations of Holmes, for example, were a bit over the top. Second. In some areas he seemed to cherry pick the evidence. In other areas, the conclusions were all over the place. On Holmes, Rosen had virtually nothing positive to say nor did he attempt to introduce any balance. On Black though, his arguments were all over the map. Was Black 's style really that effective towards the end? Also, is Scalia really that ineffective? Is he really that much of an ideologue considering how often he departs from conservatives on criminal justice issues and a loner considering Ginsburg is one of his closest friends? Third, I think he missed the mark by not adding a chapter on Burger versus Brennan. Finally, the writing could have been better. Too many gratuitous "big" words. The writing was just gaudy with very little reward in elegance.I should note the interview with Justice Roberts was illuminating. I think that might have been one of the stronger chapters in the book. Also, Rosen's assessment of Harlan (mostly the first one, but to a lesser extent, the second) and Rehnquist were interesting.There are some gems, but overall, this is a mediocre book.

insightful, informed, extraordinarily educational.should be required reading at the elementary school level, although it is a book for all ages.while the views are that of the author, he is a highly informed student of the Court and warrant serious consideration by all citizens, in my view.It also teaches a lot about American history and how organizations work in general.I highly recommend the book. A few sections are somewhat technical, but worth it.

The theory laid out by the author is that the justices on the court who have the most ability to build consensus are the most successful and the ones most likely to have their cases stand the test of time. He utilizes 3 sets of justices and a justice and a president to attempt to make his argument.While the book is interesting, and offers interesting insights into the minds of the people involved as well as a look at their judicial philosophies, I think the book suffers from one major flaw. While making the case using these justices, he ignores numerous other justices. It is my suspicion, although I cannot verify it, that if he used different pairs of justices, his conclusions might have been a bit different. Put another way, it is very possible that the author cherry picked these justices to make his point.To be a valid hypothesis, the author would have to look at other pairs of justices and see if his idea holds water. Until that happens, this is just another book that examines the quirks of the various justices involved.

This book is more like 4 mini books in one. It describes in detail four different historical periods in the Supreme Court and how conflicting views among it's 9 members have shaped our current laws and higher legal system.While it's an interesting vignette into the lives of the some of the Supreme Court Justices, there really isn't much to be learned about the institution itself. If you're looking for information on specific cases, you wont find them here. This is a book about the justices, their personalities, their lives, and how their feuds helped shape the court into what it is today.The book has no partisan message, it's more about the people than the politics. There is some criticism of Justice's Alito and Thomas but it's more for their ideological inconsistency than some sort of liberal bias. It's worth a read if you're interested in the Supreme Court.

For a look into some of the most well known figures in the Supreme Court, this book does a fantastic job. From in-depth analysis of their personalities to little anecdotes on each Justice, the Author clearly knows his history.It's a tad short, and I think the specific cases could have been covered in greater detail. While it was informative, it didn't have that something special that had me anxious to keep reading. At times, I felt like I was reading a history book.If you're someone looking to get some background into the Supreme Court and some of the characters that shaped it, this is a good book to start with. You may not feel completely entertained, but you will feel smarter after reading this book.

The use of justice pairs gives a special and unique insight. The author does not hide his biases regarding the decisions nor the justices, but the book is informative just the same and is recommended for persons who want to learn more about the Court.

Rosen is an excellent writer and knows his subject. I teach major Supreme Court decisions and have incorporated much of Rosen's content in my teachings and discussions.

Fantastic book. Really interesting insight into the politics of the Supreme Court

Jeffrey Rosen's way of contrasting the different approaches of judges to their task is quite interesting and gives one some insights into the way the Supreme Court works and/or should be working. The book might almost be called a textbook for future judges, or a guideline for future presidents how (not) to choose judges for the Supreme Court. At the same time Rosen manages to 'humanize' the judges and to show some of the struggles a judge might have to face in order to arrive at a decision that is as impartial as possible.