 | LawyerBuzz.com Navigation | |
|
|
| |
| The Activist: John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, and the Myth of Judicial Review | 
 enlarge | Author: Lawrence Goldstone
Publisher: Walker & Company
Category: Book
List Price: $26.00
Buy New: $7.99
You Save: $18.01 (69%)
Buy New/Used from $7.99
Avg. Customer Rating:  (3 reviews)
Sales Rank: 311482
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Unknown), English (Published)
Media: Hardcover
Edition: 1
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 304
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.3
Dimensions (in): 9.4 x 6.1 x 1.2
ISBN: 0802714889
Dewey Decimal Number: 347.7312
EAN: 9780802714886
ASIN: 0802714889
Publication Date: September 2, 2008
Release Date: September 2, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The story of the landmark case that put the ?Supreme? in Supreme Court. Among the many momentous decisions rendered by the Supreme Court, none has had a greater impact than that passed down in 1803 by Chief Justice John Marshall in the case of Marbury v. Madison. While the ruling itself was innocuous?denying the plea of a minor functionary named William Marbury on constitutionally technical grounds?its implications were enormous. For Marshall had, in essence, claimed for the Supreme Court the right to determine what the Constitution and our laws under it really mean, known formally as the principle of ?judicial review.? Yet, as Lawrence Goldstone shows in his compelling narrative, that right is nowhere expressed in the Constitution and was not even considered by the Framers or the Founding Fathers, who would never have granted such power in a checks-and-balances system to unelected officials serving for life. The Activist underscores the drama that occurred in 1803 by examining the debates that took place during the Constitutional Convention of 1787?among the most dramatic moments in American history?over the formation and structure of our judicial system. In parallel, Goldstone introduces in brief the life and ambition of John Marshall, and the early, fragile years of the Supreme Court, which?until Marshall?s ascension to Chief Justice?sat atop the weakest of the three branches of government. Marshall made the Court supreme, and while judicial review has been used sparingly, without it the Court would likely never have intervened in the 2000 presidential election. Indeed, the great irony Goldstone reveals is that judicial review is now so enfranchised that Justice Antonin Scalia could admit, as he has, that the Supreme Court ?made it up? in the same breath as he insists that justices must adhere steadfastly to the exact words of the Constitution. Nobody brings the debates of the Constitutional Convention to life as does Lawrence Goldstone, and in this election year, no more interesting book on the Supreme Court will appear than The Activist, which makes the past come alive in the present.
|
| Customer Reviews:
 The journey of judicial review December 16, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
Once you're traveling in Constitutional legal circles, "activist" is an epithet --- meaning, basically, that the other person with whom you do not share a political party is using the Constitution for political purposes. A horrible thing, to be sure. Most of the time (but not always, there are exceptions) the opposite epithet is "originalist," which means that the other person wants to interpret the Constitution based on the received wisdom of the Founding Fathers, looking down on us, as from a judicial Olympus with haughty and austere visages, proclaiming the Only Right Approach to Constitutional issues, in voices dry as dust and tinged with the irritation of the centuries.
One suspects, however, that if the Founders were confronted with the issues the Supreme Court is now facing --- particularly the recent Establishment Clause case involving an obscure Utah cult dedicated, among other things, to the practice of mummifying pets --- that the exalted personages would find themselves laughing like drains at the absurdity of it all.
Lawrence Goldstone's avowed purpose is to illustrate that one of the Founding Fathers --- John Marshall, the first great and consequential Chief Justice --- belongs in the "activist" category, and the question of whether he accomplishes this purpose will be left to the intelligent and discerning reader. What he actually manages to do, however (at least in the area of judicial review), is shatter originalism into a thousand broken pieces, scattered across the marble corridors of jurisprudence like the debris of a gallant but doomed civilization overrun by bandits.
The book traces judicial review --- the idea that an unelected judiciary should have the authority to invalidate legislative or executive actions that conflict with the Constitution --- through the Articles of Confederation all the way down to the thump of Marbury v. Madison landing on John Marshall's desk. And what Goldstone finds in all this mass of historical evidence is the loud, clear, unequivocal voice of the Founding Fathers, stating in unison, "Well, I don't know, what do you think?"
Of course, they said no such thing --- although it would have been much more helpful if they had, because (as Goldstone proves, and a comprehensive job he does of it) there really isn't all that much in the record, and what there is displays a good bit of division on the issue, when there is not a complete lack of effort to come to grips with the question. Goldstone follows the tracks of judicial review through the lost history of the ratifying conventions and the Federalist-Antifederalist debate, and comes up with a startling lack of consensus on how the Supreme Court should apply the Constitution to the law in case of a conflict.
The issue wouldn't come up for quite some time --- not until the famous case of Marbury v. Madison --- allowing Goldstone to map out the early years of the Supreme Court, notable primarily for the Justice's gripes about "circuit riding," traveling across the then-remote American wilderness to hold court outside Washington. He does a phenomenal job of making the murky facts of Marbury, and their even murkier political context, clear and understandable. If Goldstone can't do quite the same thing for Justice Marshall's opinion in Marbury, there's a reason for that. He calls Marbury a "masterpiece of misdirection," and his clear prose does little to illuminate the thickets of Marshall's. (The Marbury opinion is included as an appendix for the adventurous.)
THE ACTIVIST proves its central point convincingly; Marbury was an activist decision, perhaps bordering on the partisan. But it does something else entirely, and greater; by parsing out the history of the idea of judicial review, it demolishes the myth that today's Constitutional issues can best be resolved by consulting the founding documents. There is, after all, no guarantee that they would agree with us on the issues, any more than they agreed with each other.
--- Reviewed by Curtis Edmonds
 Misconception about a Myth November 30, 2008
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
The title certainly demands attention, but mine was quickly dampened when I delved inside. On the first page, the author quotes Justice Scalia on what it means to be of the school of constitutional law known as the textualist school: "If you are a textualist, you don't care about the intent, and I don't care if the framers of the Constitution had some secret meaning in mind when they adopted its words. I take the words as they were promulgated to the people of the United States, and what is the fairly understood meaning of those words." Then, as if it somehow follows from Justice Scalia's credo, Goldstone adds his own fallacious riff: "To an originalist, then, anything more not specifically enunciated in the Constitution cannot be the law." Hardly. By Mr. Goldstone's definition, any originalist must refuse (among other things): any State immunity from suit by private parties in Federal court, Congress the power to make mail fraud a federal crime, and the President any privileged conversation with an advisor. I could not bring myself to read on, for fear of finding more error of the same sort.
 Excellent analysis of how Marshall seized power for Supreme Court November 19, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
Lawrence Goldstone's The Activist is a surprisingly readable analysis of the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice John Marshall, with particular focus on the Marbury v. Madison 1803 decision, and the background leading up to it.
When Federalists were ousted from power by Republican electoral victories, their only remaining redoubt was the Supreme Court, but it had little power. Marshall, however, misused a procedural error regarding a lawsuit by an office seeker named Marbury as an excuse to seize power for the Supreme Court that the Constitution had never intended it to have, namely, the power of judicial review. With this power, the Supreme Court could "strike down" acts by the legislature if it deemed them contrary to the Constitution. What a huge power. In a way, John Marshall rewrote the Constitution. Goldstone's book appears well-researched (sorry, I'm not a scholar or fact checker or academic). It's well written and delightful to read, and Goldstone maintains a tone of respectful non-partisan fairness. And he argues, convincingly, that Marshall's Marbury decision has affected the lives of every American today.
Note: Perhaps Marbury v. Madison was a key turning point in an inexorable ascent of political power from the local to the federal level, but clearly it wasn't the only cause. Rather, in retrospect, it was a noticeably loud crack in the foundation of the New Republic, in my view. By combining Tocqueville's later analysis of democratic America with a logical cause and effect, it's possible to explain the sad state of American politics today, with attack ads, money ruling Washington, bloated bureaucracy, waffling foreign policy. I think the political process today is broken to the point where the only remedy is a Second Constitutional Convention (I'm summoning delegates to meet in Philadelphia in July 2009), and that a mere change of parties, executives, amendments, or a shift from right to left are insufficient to fix serious structural problems. Washington is like a crashed computer unresponsive to keystrokes. Readers may be interested in my critique -- Common Sense II: How to Prevent the Three Types of Terrorism on Amazon (available on Amazon & Kindle). Mr. Goldstone is one of the few people smart enough to help rewrite the Constitution, so I'll be sending him an invitation to the Constitutional Convention soon, and I hope he attends.
Back to Goldstone's book: it's excellent for Constitutional scholars, history students, lawyers, and people interested in the Supreme Court. That it's so artfully written makes it a delight. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
The Lawsuit and Self Help Legal Law Book Store From LawyerBuzz.comInternational Orders & Shipping
We can ship to virtually any address in the world. Note that there are restrictions on some products, and some products cannot be shipped to international destinations.
Shipping Restrictions
Warranty issues and manufacturer restrictions prevent us from shipping certain products to all geographical locations. You'll be notified while placing your order if we're unable to ship specific items to the address you've selected.
International Addresses
The following items can be shipped to destinations outside the U.S.:
* books*
* DVDs
* music
* VHS videos
Additionally, some software, tools, and kitchen items can be shipped to the following countries:
* Australia
* Austria
* Denmark
* Finland
* France
* Germany
* Japan
* Ireland
* Italy
* Netherlands
* New Zealand
* Sweden
* United Kingdom
These items can be shipped only via Priority International Shipping and are subject to an import fees deposit.
*Note: Books that require special handling because they are extremely heavy (for example, multi-volume sets) cannot be shipped outside the U.S. If this is the case, it will be noted on the product detail page.
When you place an order, we will estimate shipping and delivery dates for you based on the availability of your items and the shipping options you choose. Shipping date estimates will appear in the order form. After placing your order, you will see both shipping and delivery date estimates in the order confirmation e-mail and in the order summary in Your Account.
Calculating Cost
Shipping costs depend upon the method and option you choose.
If you choose to group items into as few shipments as possible, you'll be charged for one regular per-shipment fee, as well as a per-item fee for each item in that shipment.
If you choose to ship items as soon as they become available, we'll charge you full per-shipment fees for each shipment as well as a per-item fee for each item.
Please also note that the shipping rates for many items we sell are weight-based. The weight of any such item can be found on its detail page. To reflect the policies of the shipping companies we use, all weights will be rounded up to the next full pound. |
|
|
| | |