An illuminating look at the human side of the highest court.



Authoritative analysis of how the justices’ “quirks of personality and temperament” have shaped American law and made the Court one of our strongest institutions.

Rosen (Law/George Washington Univ.; The Naked Crowd, 2004, etc.) traces the Court’s evolution through the stories of four pairs of personalities and their clashes over important issues. The most successful justices, he argues, have been “institutionalists”: effective leaders and consensus-builders who are modest, likable, able to find common ground and more concerned about the legitimacy of the Court than their own interests and agendas. The least successful justices have been insecure, heavy-handed “loners” more interested in personal glory than in quietly getting things done. Specialists will appreciate Rosen’s examinations of these conflicting judicial temperaments at play during different periods in history; general readers without a solid grounding in constitutional issues may feel lost. The basic differences animating these clashing duos are made clear. Crafty and appealing Chief Justice John Marshall managed time after time to outfox his introverted, thin-skinned political opponent, Thomas Jefferson. Gregarious Justice John Marshall Harlan won out on the issue of majority rule over darker, more ideological Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. The persuasive Hugo Black, deeply devoted to the institution of the Court, proved far more influential on key issues than undisciplined, self-destructive William O. Douglas. Of modern conservative justices, Rosen finds that the pragmatic William H. Rehnquist was much more respected within the Court than Antonin Scalia, a rigid purist. A concluding chapter based on an interview with Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. suggests that he may have the temperament of his successful predecessors.

An illuminating look at the human side of the highest court.

Pub Date: Jan. 9, 2007

ISBN: 0-8050-8182-8

Page Count: 288

Publisher: Times/Henry Holt

Review Posted Online: June 24, 2010

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Nov. 1, 2006

Did you like this book?

No Comments Yet

The author's youthfulness helps to assure the inevitable comparison with the Anne Frank diary although over and above the...


Elie Wiesel spent his early years in a small Transylvanian town as one of four children. 

He was the only one of the family to survive what Francois Maurois, in his introduction, calls the "human holocaust" of the persecution of the Jews, which began with the restrictions, the singularization of the yellow star, the enclosure within the ghetto, and went on to the mass deportations to the ovens of Auschwitz and Buchenwald. There are unforgettable and horrifying scenes here in this spare and sombre memoir of this experience of the hanging of a child, of his first farewell with his father who leaves him an inheritance of a knife and a spoon, and of his last goodbye at Buchenwald his father's corpse is already cold let alone the long months of survival under unconscionable conditions. 

The author's youthfulness helps to assure the inevitable comparison with the Anne Frank diary although over and above the sphere of suffering shared, and in this case extended to the death march itself, there is no spiritual or emotional legacy here to offset any reader reluctance.

Pub Date: Jan. 16, 2006

ISBN: 0374500010

Page Count: 120

Publisher: Hill & Wang

Review Posted Online: Oct. 7, 2011

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Jan. 15, 2006

Did you like this book?


Bernstein and Woodward, the two Washington Post journalists who broke the Big Story, tell how they did it by old fashioned seat-of-the-pants reporting — in other words, lots of intuition and a thick stack of phone numbers. They've saved a few scoops for the occasion, the biggest being the name of their early inside source, the "sacrificial lamb" H**h Sl**n. But Washingtonians who talked will be most surprised by the admission that their rumored contacts in the FBI and elsewhere never existed; many who were telephoned for "confirmation" were revealing more than they realized. The real drama, and there's plenty of it, lies in the private-eye tactics employed by Bernstein and Woodward (they refer to themselves in the third person, strictly on a last name basis). The centerpiece of their own covert operation was an unnamed high government source they call Deep Throat, with whom Woodward arranged secret meetings by positioning the potted palm on his balcony and through codes scribbled in his morning newspaper. Woodward's wee hours meetings with Deep Throat in an underground parking garage are sheer cinema: we can just see Robert Redford (it has to be Robert Redford) watching warily for muggers and stubbing out endless cigarettes while Deep Throat spills the inside dope about the plumbers. Then too, they amass enough seamy detail to fascinate even the most avid Watergate wallower — what a drunken and abusive Mitchell threatened to do to Post publisher Katherine Graham's tit, and more on the Segretti connection — including the activities of a USC campus political group known as the Ratfuckers whose former members served as a recruiting pool for the Nixon White House. As the scandal goes public and out of their hands Bernstein and Woodward seem as stunned as the rest of us at where their search for the "head ratfucker" has led. You have to agree with what their City Editor Barry Sussman realized way back in the beginning — "We've never had a story like this. Just never."

Pub Date: June 18, 1974

ISBN: 0671894412

Page Count: 372

Publisher: Simon & Schuster

Review Posted Online: Oct. 10, 2011

Kirkus Reviews Issue: June 1, 1974

Did you like this book?

No Comments Yet