“The Roberts Court: The Struggle for the Constitution” by Marcia Coyle. The two would work well read together. Marcia coyle has an easy to read style and yet does not sacrifice any of the needed depth or research.The way this book was organized (in four sections: Money, Guns, Health Care, Race) and written made it hard to stay engaged, but I very much appreciated getting more information about recent big deal decisions - Citizens United, Affordable Care Act, and some affirmative action rulings, in particular. I did enjoy the way the author compared and contrasted justices past and present. She also interviewed the lawyers and litigants on both sides of the four highest profiled cases, of enormous consequence of 5-4 decisions, of the Roberts court from 2007 to 2009. "The answer is, of course, you are certainly not going to be John Marshall. © Copyright 2020 Rolling Stone, LLC, a subsidiary of Penske Business Media, LLC. He added: "If the Chief Justice believes his political judgment is so exquisite, I invite him to resign, travel to Iowa, and get elected. Roberts' recent moves on issues of great cultural relevance are distinct and of varying legal significance. At first I feared this would limit Coyle's ability to tell the full story of the Robert Court, but she does an excellent job of using this framework as a guide rather than being rigidly limited by it. It could have been closer to four stars if it were not so entrenched in partisan, often already-discredited, liberal thinking on the legal matters.A good book about four major cases that define the current Roberts Court in the United States Supreme Court.
She also interviewed the lawyers and litigants on both sides of the four highest-profile cases of the Roberts era — involving affirmative action in public schools, gun rights, campaign finance and health care. On top of dominating the court’s decisions, The chief’s power was evident in some of the court’s most high-profile cases. A book published whose central topic is a relatively guarded institution seven years after the start of the books focus will likely not be very insightful. While rejecting the idea that the president is above the law (the position put forward by President Trump), the chief’s opinions for the court gave the president wide latitude to control the executive branch on his own and to force other parts of federal and state government to recognize his importance.This isn’t the all-out grant of power to the president that the court’s most conservative justices wanted, but these opinions are also not a clear check on presidential power. Since John G. Roberts Jr. became chief justice five years ago, the court's ideological divide has been on display in a host of important constitutional and social issues. But this Court's judicial activism primarily favors large corporations. She also interviewed the lawyers and litigants on both sides of the four highest profiled cases, of enormous consequence of 5-4 decisions, of the Roberts court from 2007Marcia Coyle is the national law Journal’s long time Chief Washington correspondent. The Roberts Court, seven years old, sits at the center of a constitutional maelstrom. "The question today however is not whether Whole Woman's Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case." Yet it captures key issues at a point in time. Subscribe now for more from the authority on music, entertainment, politics and pop culture.Sign up for our newsletter and go inside the world of music, culture and entertainment.But don’t get it wrong: He still reigns over an undoubtedly conservative court Roberts' recent moves on issues of great cultural relevance are distinct and of varying legal significance. The Roberts Court, seven years old, sits at the center of a constitutional maelstrom. I enjoyed her interviews with the justices and former clerks.Marcia Coyle told me things I never knew about the procedures of the Supreme Court. She concludes that Roberts, despite his affirmation at confirmation hearings that he believes in narrow rulings with great respect for precedents, has not consistently followed this judicial path.Marcia Coyle analyzes the jurisprudential shift in the Supreme Court starting with John Roberts’s arrival at the court as its new chief justice. In the LGBTQ case, for example, Trump appointee Justice Neil Gorsuch cast the decisive fifth vote in the dispute over interpretation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. May 7th 2013 A good companion to Toobin's "The Oath". It's broken down in to four parts: racial integration in schools; guns; money in elections; and the Affordable Care Act. See our She is especially good on the maneuvering of various special interest groups to identify and guide particular cases through the legal system, all with a hopeful eye toward eventual Supreme Court review. She focused on four cases that illustrate the court's positions on race (school desegregation), guns (D.C.'s handgun ban), money (Citizens United), and health care (Affordable Care Act).