An examination of the initial years of the Roberts Court and the intellectual battle between Roberts and Kagan for leadership.
When John Roberts was appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court, he said he would act as an umpire. Instead, his Court is reshaping legal precedent through decisions unmistakably - though not always predictably - determined by politics as much as by law, on a Court almost perfectly politically divided.
Harvard Law School professor and constitutional law expert Mark Tushnet clarifies the lines of conflict and what is at stake on the Supreme Court as it hangs “in the balance” between its conservatives and its liberals.
Decently well written. I would recommend to a friend that understand the Constitution. Probably tough to understand for the non-lawyer.
I really enjoyed listening to this book. I knew most of the cases, but not the slant in the decisions, which was illuminating. His reference to the future "Kagan Court" was inspiring and gave me a chill; we will see what happens after the next election.
I found Tushnet's analysis of the contemporary SCOTUS to be insightful, well-reasoned, compelling, and admirably even-handed. Though he provides analysis and discussion of a range of landmark decisions, his treatment of the Court's more recent decisions of import (Citizen's United, Affordable Care Act) are considerably more nuanced.