|
Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court | 
 enlarge | Author: Edward Lazarus
Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics)
Category: Book
List Price: $18.00
Buy Used: $0.49
You Save: $17.51 (97%)
New (45) Used (58) Collectible (2) from $0.49
Avg. Customer Rating:  51 reviews
Sales Rank: 491384
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 608
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.1
Dimensions (in): 7.8 x 5.1 x 1.6
ISBN: 0143035274
Dewey Decimal Number: 347.73
EAN: 9780143035275
ASIN: 0143035274
Publication Date: May 3, 2005
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Stained Edges;Creased Cover;Book Bent Or Slightly Warped;Corners Damaged;ugly but readable Buy from the best: 4,000,000 items shipped to delighted customers. We have 1,000,000 unique items ready to ship today!
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
Edward Lazarus, a former Supreme Court clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun, spills the beans on an institution that values silence. Nobody is supposed to understand what happens behind the scenes of the high court--that's why the justices rarely speak to the media--but Lazarus tells all he knows from his time as a top aide to Blackmun in the Supreme Court's 1988 term. There's a lot of legal theory and history, but it's well presented and usually focuses on touchstone issues in U.S. politics; cases involving abortion, the death penalty, and racial preferences receive sustained treatment in these pages. There are gossipy bits, too, revealing unflattering details about several current justices. Sure to be one of the more controversial books of the year. --John J. Miller
Product Description
When Closed Chambers was first published, it was met with a firestorm of controversyas well as a shower of praisefor being the first book to break the code of silence about the inner workings of this countrys most powerful court. In this eloquent, trailblazing account, with a new chapter covering Bush v. Gore, Guantanamo, and other recent controversial court decisions, Edward Lazarus, who served as a clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun, presents a searing indictment of a court at war with itself and often in neglect of its constitutional duties. Combining memoir, history, and legal analysis, Lazarus reveals in astonishing detail the realities of what takes place behind the closed doors of the U.S. Supreme Courtan institution that through its rulings holds the power to affect the life of every American.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 46 more reviews...
 The Supreme Court in Masterful Context July 22, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Edward Lazarus's Closed Chambers is a master work; and joins Bernard Schwartz's Super Chief as the two best books I've read to date about the Supreme Court. I strongly disagree with the opinion that Lazarus's book does not deliver what it promises.
The Supreme Court is an institution chock-full of mystique-its deliberations often shrouded in cloistered secrecy. Therefore, it's only natural that readers would want a birds-eye view of how the Court actually works. Lazarus gives us such a view, and does it exceedingly well.
For example, he explains that the Court's cases generally arise through the federal appellate courts below it in 12 regional circuits throughout the country;that it will likely hear a case if at least 2 circuit courts disagree about the same federal controversy;its decision to hear a case(or "grant cert")requires thes vote of at least 4 Justices; and that the Court will then issue a briefing schedule for the appellant and respondent attorneys, and schedule oral argument. Following oral argument, the Court will debate amongst themselves at conference.
Afterward, the Justices eventually vote to support either the appellant's or respondent's position. The intrigue involved here is often riveting, for each Justice must persuade his/her colleague to accept his or her view of the case. How successfully the Justice does so determines which Justice assigns the majority opinion for the Court-and which Justice gets to write it.
Having this technical information alone, however useful, comes nowhere close to giving a full appreciation of how the Court actually works.
Like the Constitution, the Court is a dynamic institution which has evolved greatly over time. Having served as a clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun in the 1988 Term, Lazarus is in a unique insider's position to provide searing and poignant historical context to how the Court has
addressed its most explosive and divisive issues: a). the death penalty(with its inherent connections to race and poverty); b). affirmative action; and c). abortion. Without this needed historical background, one cannot fully understand how and why the Court has calcified into rigid ideological(liberal-conservative)camps on these, and far too many other issues. This hardening process was no accident. In the case of the death penalty, it resulted largely from the success of liberal death penalty abolitionist lawyers in the 1950s. Lazarus argues that for all the moral courage implicit in their anti-death penalty stands, Justices Thurgood Marshall and William Brennan ironically lost influence; for Richard Nixon's elections in 1968 and 1972 eventually produced a successful conservative legal counterweight to abolition. This is seen most clearly when Lazarus chronicled how law clerks have become(and remain) important components of the ideological battleground the Court has become. Lazarus laments that on such a battleground, the Justices have allowed reasoned legal argument to give way to strident political advocacy.
Conservatives now largely control the agenda, particularly regarding affirmative action.
Because Lazarus humanized the plight of the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade; and because he revealed how deeply Justice Blackmun agonized over its authorship, I now understand the abortion issue in a new way. He argues that had the Justices approached Roe v. Wade and its progeny from the perspective of gender equity rather than privacy, they could have reached a less tortured consensus. This in turn could have enabled them to issue clearer, more consistent opinions as a result.
Lazarus also explained essential terms such as strict scrutiny-one of many "tests" the Court has developed to guide how rigorous it will be when evaluating the constitutionality of a legislature's laws or actions.
In 540 brilliant pages, Closed Chambers explores how the Court works; WHY it works as it does; and what it means. It is exhaustively researched, with each case cited and expanded upon as appropriate. Could Lazarus have written an equally good book in many fewer pages? Probably, but don't be deterred. The book's length is not a burden. Fortunately for us, Lazarus decided that given his rare insider perspective; and the gravity of the issues past and present before the Court; only his maximum effort would do justice to himself, his book, and its deservedly many readers. Lazarus's choice to provide us more rather than less makes Closed Chambers a profound and essential book.
Excellent but challenging May 5, 2006
6 out of 6 found this review helpful
Closed Chambers is highly entertaining and gracefully written, but it is not for the average reader. Lazarus discusses so many cases and jurists that it's hard to keep track of everything. This is especially true about the death penalty section of the book, which is by far the most tedious. This is why I gave it 4 stars and not 5.
Let me dispell some things that have been said in other Amazon reviews of this book. There are no totally unbiased historians, and if there were, they would be too boring to read. Lazarus makes his moderate-to-liberal judicial leanings clear, but without question, he offers sharp criticism of both sides of the Supreme Court aisle, as it were. Although he is undoubtedly critical of Rehnquist (who he considers exceptionally dishonest), Kennedy (who he sees as unprincipled and inconsistent), and Thomas (who he derides for his lack of qualification as well as his disrespect for court institutions), he is also quite critical of Brennan (who he characterizes as pathetically grasping at the straws of a bygone era), Marshall (who he thinks was extremely feebleminded at the end of his life), and the modern-day "liberal" judicial establishment in general (which he characterizes as hypocritical for many many reasons). Lazarus has a lot of respect for certain non-liberals, such as Scalia, who he sees as the sharpest thinker on the bench, as well as Stewart (who isn't a main character, but still). In general, he personally identifies less with the Warren court and more with a Harlan-esque judicial strategy, shying away from big sweeping rulings and instead favoring cautiously incremental changes. As for his favorite justices, he obviously holds Harlan in high regard, as he does Souter.
More than anything, Lazarus advocates a Supreme Court where reasoning plays a larger role than results, a Court that stands above the frey of politics. He calls out both liberals and conservatives as hypocrites in this vein. Although the conservatives bear more of his rage, this is because 1) most justices over the period he details have been conservatives and 2) he clerked for Blackmun, for whom he obviously has a lot of respect and empathy and personal friendship.
Many of the reviewers on this site appear to have not read Closed Chambers either attentively or at all. To call this book a leftist diatribe is to totally miss the point. Lazarus is certainly opinionated, but his opinions are only mildly political. Great book.
Excellent read for the non-lawyer March 7, 2006
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
I enjoyed this book quite a bit. I wouldn't take everything Lazarus says as gospel truth. It's clear from reading various reviews that some of his facts are wrong, and the vast majority of the book is based on research and even things he's just heard, rather than things he witnessed. But I find myself thinking about the book often and I think it's a valuable read for anyone who wants a better understanding of our legal system.
Insightful, lucid, still topical November 25, 2005
4 out of 6 found this review helpful
Perhaps the best, most well thought out, and easiest to read account of what the supreme court is all about.
Fascinating book provides inside scoop on the supremes January 21, 2005
8 out of 9 found this review helpful
It is about time that someone brings sunlight to the inner workings of the Supreme Court. In spite of his decidedly liberal political leanings, Lazarus provides an objective look at the inner workings of the supreme court circa 1988. Lazarus does an excellent job of showing how the polarization of the Court has been detrimental to the pursuit of justice, just as the polarization of Congress has been detrimental to the legislative process.
Although non-lawyers may find his writing a bit technical, particularly on esoteric legal issues, they will nonetheless appreciate his candid views on the justices' decisionmaking process.
And finally a challange to the critics who believe that Lazarus has betrayed his employer: Please explain why we are not entitled to know how the highest court in the land makes its decisions. Congress has public hearings that are broadcast on CSPAN. The President receives more media attention than any other person in the world (absent the late Princess Di) and his minions will write dozens of tell-all books after he leaves office. Why should the Court be exempt from scrutiny? If the justices are embarassed then maybe they should change their ways.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
