July 2, 2012
Yale law professor Amar follows his highly regarded historical-textual analysis of America’s Constitution with a companion volume on the history, culture, and legal tenets of the “unwritten constitution,” the traditions and precedents that inform constitutional interpretation. Amar proposes that the unwritten constitution is by necessity on equal grounds with the written one and provides the context for unraveling the many questions the Constitution leaves undetermined. In effect, the unwritten constitution fills the gaps necessary to make the Constitution a working, living document. Among the “documents” Amar cites are the precepts of early English jurisprudence; Supreme Court decisions, including cases that are notorious because they were wrongly decided; and famous speeches, like the Gettysburg Address that presaged the meaning of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Among the many examples Amar uses to explain the interplay between the written and unwritten Constitution are death penalty jurisprudence, the right to a jury trial, and the establishment clause of the First Amendment. He also examines the constitutionality of special prosecutors, political parties, and filibusters to effectively make his point: the Constitution’s textual limitations and its interpretation require acknowledging the unwritten constitution. Sophisticated readers will be rewarded for traveling with Amar as he covers a great deal of ground. Agents: Glen Hartley and Lynn Chu.
August 1, 2012
Amar (Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale Univ.; America's Constitution: A Biography) argues that the "unwritten Constitution," consisting of common law, common practice, and judicial procedure, is the foundation of the written U.S. Constitution and is equally important. The book addresses a complex subject, but Amar's introduction, which explains his approach and identifies his sources, states that it is written for general readers. Each chapter discusses these sources at length. The most interesting passages consider influences on the Constitution never anticipated by its framers, such as the women's rights movement; Amar provides detailed coverage of the Nineteenth Amendment as well as two seminal court decisions, Griswold v. Connecticut, which overturned a Connecticut ruling banning the use of birth control and implied a constitutional right to privacy, and Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion based on this right to privacy. Amar points out that these rights are a natural outgrowth of the Constitution's explicit guarantees. VERDICT Though written for lay readers, this is not a general introduction to the Constitution. Those with previous knowledge of Constitutional law and American politics and history will enjoy it. Undergraduates studying political science will also find it useful. Recommended.--Becky Kennedy, Atlanta-Fulton P.L., GA
Copyright 2012 Library Journal, LLC Used with permission.
July 15, 2012
A carefully reasoned defense of the United States Constitution as the foundation--but only the foundation--of our legal system. At a mere 8,000 words, the Constitution can only sketch basic rules for governing America. This hasn't prevented a large group--which includes a few Supreme Court judges--from insisting that it contains within itself a perfect and unchanging legal system. Amar (Law and Political Science/Yale Univ.; America's Constitution: A Biography, 2005) disagrees, laying out his argument in case-by-case details that are scholarly and legalistic but always readable. He emphasizes that much of our unwritten Constitution is written--Supreme Court opinions, presidential proclamations, congressional acts--but that it also encompasses common sense and legal scholarship that aims to decipher a document that contains no instructions on how to interpret its many general statements. Thus, almost everyone believes that the Constitution prohibits anyone in government from limiting freedom of speech, religion and assembly. In fact, the first amendment only prohibits Congress. From the beginning, it was implicit (a terrible word to strict constructionists) that the president, courts and state governments do not get a free pass, but the written Constitution is silent. The Constitution designates the vice-president as president of the Senate: its presiding officer. If impeached, the vice-president could preside over the Senate as it tries his case, acting as both judge and defendant. This is not only absurd, but legal tradition forbids it. If it happened, the Senate would change the arrangements, but the Constitution is no help. A dense but ingenious mixture of history, legal anecdotes and hypothetical cases.
COPYRIGHT(2012) Kirkus Reviews, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.