 |
A People's History of the Supreme Court by Peter Irons
Book Summary InformationAuthor: Peter Irons Preface: Howard Zinn Edition: Hardcover Audio: English (Original Language); English (Unknown); English (Published) Published: 1999-08-01 ISBN: 0670870064 Number of pages: 512 Publisher: Viking Adult
Book Reviews of A People's History of the Supreme CourtBook Review: A Patriotic Triumph of Historiography Summary: 5 StarsPeter Irons is an ardent patriot. He believes passionately in the founding promises of America as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights: "all men are created equal" - "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" for all people - "justice for all" - "promote the General welfare" - "no law respecting an establishment of religion....or abridging the freedom of speech." With these ideals always in mind, Irons is not hesitant about passing judgement on America and the Americans, in this book on the Supreme Court, when actions are committed or decisions made which fail to fulfill these promises. In other words, Irons is not an impartial, neutral historian. If the reader has dissimilar understandings of the founding promises, she or he may react hostilely to A People's History of the Supreme Court. But that reader especially should make the effort to suspend judgement and read on. This is a very fine book even if you disagree with it. Irons knows his judicial history well, and he explains the issues of important Supreme Court decisions with amazing clarity. He also treats the key personalities of Supreme Court history with respect, recognizing the greatness even of Justices whose opinions had unfortunate consequences. The only justices he scorns are those who made no contribution.
The first seven chapters of the book describe the battles and compromises that went into the writing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and thereafter into the establishment of the first Supreme Court. We hear a lot about the "intentions" of the founding fathers these days; Irons analyzes what we can and can't be sure of, concerning those intentions, with masterful support from the available sources. He establishes very convincingly that from the start America has been polarized over the intertwined issues of racism and the proper balance of federal authority versus states' rights. Irons clearly defends his interpretation of the Constitution as a document establishing federal authority, but yielding fatal compromises with the usually less-than-admirable demands of states with peculiar institutions. Slavery is of course the biggest and most fatal such compromise, the one that most threatened to destroy the efforts of the Constitution-writers, and the one that the Supreme Court failed to resolve in keeping with the founding promises for the longest time - not making much progress until the Warren Court.
Irons plainly believes that "states' rights" has most frequently been a pretext for reneging on those founding promises of justice and equality. He makes a very good case throughout the book that the federal government has frequently operated just as Madison hoped in his Federalist essays, eventually though painfully imposing justice for all when one or several states denied justice to some. The implication is that the federal government, with its awkward checks and balances, is indeed the guardian of the Constitution and of the American aspirations of liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The very best section of the book is Section IV: Liberty in a Social Organization. These seven chapters deal with economic justice, beginning with the distressing misuse of the 14th Amendment by the courts and the Supreme Court to impose a feudal system of employer/employee relations on the whole country, to legislate a "laissez-faire" ideology from the bench. Irons makes no bones, by the way, in finding that the Court has always been staffed with "activist" justices. The turning point in modernizing economic democracy - in fulfilling the promise of promoting the General welfare - comes in the New Deal court confrontations between the "horsemen of reaction" and the agents of reform. FDR's threat of `stacking the court' is usually portrayed as one of his most embarrassing failures, but Irons sees it rather as a piece of the drama, an effective tactic perhaps, of compelling the Court to change its ways, to stop representing only the economic interests of capitalists and to address the needs of the whole American people. Irons is not waging a propaganda campaign, however. His accounts of the crucial Court decisions of the 1930s outline the arguments for both sides with precision and balance.
Section V presents the remarkable tale of the Supreme Court turning its attention from issues of property and labor rights to issues of civil liberties. This is the drama of our lifetimes, isn't it? Obviously Irons is fully partisan to the promise of "liberty and justice for all, but once again he depicts the conflicts on the Supreme Court with marvelous clarity.
Section VI will inevitably offend those readers who define themselves as conservative. It narrates the demise of the great consensus of the Warren Court and the subsequent bitter division of the Supreme Court from Nixon to Clinton. Irons quite openly regards the Republican appointed reactionary justices as attempting to renege once more on those lovely founding promises. Still I urge conservative readers to let Irons make his case before ranting against it. He writes very well. It's an entertaining book to hate, if that's your choice after reading it.
Summary of A People's History of the Supreme CourtA major work of history, by a renowned legal scholar, chronicles an institution that affects the life of every American. In the tradition of Howard Zinn's The People's History of the United States, Peter Irons brings to the history of our Supreme Court the "human touch" (San Diego Union) of the first-person stories of his own classic book The Courage of Their Convictions. This sweeping account of the Supreme Court traces its path from the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to its controversial rulings on free speech, racial segregation, abortion, and gay rights. "When Peter Irons looks at an institution," says Kenneth Karst of UCLA Law School, "he sees the people who are its lifeblood." A People's History of the Supreme Court views that vital institution from both sides of the mahogany bench. Irons provides sketches of every justice from John Jay to Stephen Breyer and portraits of such legal giants as John Marshall, Roger Taney, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Hugo Black, Earl Warren, and Thurgood Marshall. But the people who stand in the foreground of this vivid historical mural are ordinary Americans like Dred Scott, Homer Plessy, and Michael Hardwick. The cases they brought to the Supreme Court forced the justices to confront the Constitution's promise that every American deserves "the blessings of liberty." And in this fascinating work, Irons recounts the landmark decisions in which the Court both honored and broke that promise, in cases that span more than two centuries. The savvy, chatty author of The Courage of Their Convictions brings us a scholarly reckoning of the 200-plus years of decisions made by the highest court in the land. Not surprisingly (and justifiably, given his erudite arguments), Peter H. Irons represents the court's work as a never-ending appeal of the powerless to the powerful: of the just over 100 supreme justices who have sat on the court, all but two have been white, all but two have been men, and all but seven have been Christian, whereas the supplicants to our nation's highest bar are typically racial minorities, women, and deviants in some way from the religious and social mainstream. Taking a representative (if not comprehensive) accounting of the Supreme Court's most significant decisions, Irons puts cultural and political context--and a human face--to the parties involved, painting an absorbing and involving picture of landmark cases that readers are likely to recall but not fully understand. Whether he's explicating the tortuous history of freedom-seeking slave Dred Scott or explaining the "a Jap's a Jap" reasoning behind the legal exculpation of World War II internment camps, Irons reminds us of the court's spotted history while still conveying the deep affection he has for it. (Includes a thoughtful appendix with the complete text of the Constitution and suggestions for further reading.) --Paul Hughes
|
 |