Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

Currie's masterful synthesis of legal analysis and narrative history, gives us a sophisticated and much-needed evaluation of the Supreme Court's first hundred years."A thorough, systematic, and careful assessment. . . . As a reference work for constitutional teachers, it is a gold mine."-Charles A. Lofgren, Constitutional Commentary

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

CHOICE Review

One need not be a lawyer to have an interest in constitutional law. Without a law degree, however, one should obtain a careful introduction to the canons of the Supreme Court in order to refine that interest. Currie (University of Chicago) is a prominent scholar and practiced teacher who gives a very helpful exposition of the constitutional decisions of the Court during its first century. His book is not for the casual browser, but the attentive reader will find many rewards. Currie's chatty style and colorful phrases make both the well-worked familiar material and the dense or obscure ruminations of the Court sensible, orderly, and appealing. His chronological review of the decisions is punctuated by keen evaluations of the Justices and measurements of the work of one era against that of another. His objective and subjective conclusions are perceptive and notable. For the aficianado, there are extensive and richly detailed footnotes. A determined critic might find fault with Currie's resolute effort to attach significance to the work of the 18th-century Justices. Few students of the Court have considered John Marshall's predecessors worthy of the time and space that Currie gives them; most will remain unconvinced. Currie's work is a fine study; a review of the second century would complete an impressive addition to the literature. Upper-division and graduate collections.-T.P. Campbell, Jr., Northeastern University