In Our Defense

The authors admit that their intent was 1) to make people see the Bill of Rights as more than a legal document, but a guideline created by framers who had no idea how different the nation would be centuries later, and 2) to make people think.

For each of the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution, the authors pick a case, usually criminal, and discuss it in relation to the amendment. They choose their cases carefully, and all are thought-provoking.

The Bill of Rights was created to protect the people from the government, and includes several rights delegated to those accused of crimes. However, in one poignant case, the right to confront the witness is used to declare an accused child molester's trial invalid. However, the book also lists many instances in which the Bill of Rights served as the final defense in a couple accused of Communism during the McCarthy era.

While some may find the book boring, because they're not interested in hearing about politics, many would find this book enjoyable to read, especially if they are interested in law.


Review of In Our Defense   March 19, 2003
 5 out of 6 found this review helpful

This book gave a good illustration of the Bill of Rights in Action. It gave a court case to outline each of the principles in each amendment. For example the first amendment has a case for freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly. These cases demonstrate how our laws are interpreted, how they have changed since the framers wrote the constitution, and exactly how our rights are limited. Each case also helps to define parts of each amendment that are in question. In other words, the cases are good examples of judicial decisions that help to defne our laws. I think that this book is amazing if you are in school, because it gives a very nice alternative to a textbook approach. Rather than just another boring textbook, this can be a helpful tool to teach the Bill of Rights with examples of the judicial process. Though this is a good book, I think that the Authors left out an important part of the book. It is lacking a historical background of the Bill of Rights. This book never illustrates what the framers intent was, nor does it try and communicate legal concepts. Though it may have been a good decision to leave out the legal concepts so the book would appeal to those without any legal experience, it would have been nice to at least get some information.