Here, the former Chief Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee contends, not always plausibly, that the Senate's 1987 rejection of Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork was a principled rebuff by the American people of a jurisprudential radical. In explaining his judicial philosophy in The Tempting of America (1990), Bork contended that the Senate's rejection of his candidacy for the Supreme Court illustrated the deplorable politicization of America's legal system. He also argued that his theory of ``original intent''—that is, that judges should construe the Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights narrowly and in accordance with the perceived intent of the original draftsmen of these texts, and without finding unenumerated rights in them—is the only legitimate interpretive framework. Gitenstein does little to dispel Bork's charge of politicization: His vivid descriptions of Sen. Joseph Biden's meetings with media and liberal-interest groups demonstrate plainly the nomination-process's political dimension. But he makes an arresting case that Bork's philosophy of originalism radically departs from the jurisprudential mainstream and that, if accepted by the full Court, it would have resulted in the repudiation of a half century of case law in the areas of civil rights, privacy, voting rights, and other fields. Gitenstein is less persuasive when he appears to argue, frequently citing opinion polls, that Bork's defeat was the result, not of a partisan political campaign, but of a considered judgment by the American people of Bork's judicial philosophy. He asserts finally that although the Senate was unable to prevent the creation of a conservative majority on the Supreme Court in the wake of Bork's defeat, the post-Bork Court is considerably more solicitous of ``unenumerated rights'' of individuals than if Bork were on the Court. Historically valuable as a politically partial account of the Bork nomination, but inadequate as an examination of Bork's jurisprudence.
Pub Date: Oct. 1, 1992
ISBN: 0-671-67424-2
Page Count: 384
Publisher: Simon & Schuster
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1992
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...
Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.
Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").Pub Date: May 15, 1972
ISBN: 0205632645
Page Count: 105
Publisher: Macmillan
Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011
Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972
This is not the Nutcracker sweet, as passed on by Tchaikovsky and Marius Petipa. No, this is the original Hoffmann tale of 1816, in which the froth of Christmas revelry occasionally parts to let the dark underside of childhood fantasies and fears peek through. The boundaries between dream and reality fade, just as Godfather Drosselmeier, the Nutcracker's creator, is seen as alternately sinister and jolly. And Italian artist Roberto Innocenti gives an errily realistic air to Marie's dreams, in richly detailed illustrations touched by a mysterious light. A beautiful version of this classic tale, which will captivate adults and children alike. (Nutcracker; $35.00; Oct. 28, 1996; 136 pp.; 0-15-100227-4)
Pub Date: Oct. 28, 1996
ISBN: 0-15-100227-4
Page Count: 136
Publisher: Harcourt
Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1996
BOOK REVIEW
BOOK REVIEW
© Copyright 2025 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
