This is a delightful book. It has a chatty, breezy, easy-to-read style (I am reminded of the style of a good review in the New York Times Book Review). It is interesting, educational, persuasively argued, and thought-provoking. After reading this book, I felt like I had learned some interesting things about some interesting people, and I wanted to know more. At times, it can be clever or funny, but not in a way that is strained or that trivializes the subject. If only more writing about legal theory were this good!

This tiny chap book is a wonder of wit and proverbial wisdom. Having read this so many times, I find myself crossing paths with situations in life that immediately bring many of these epigrams to mind, to the tip of the tongue where they seem to dance so nicely, so succinctly. Laughing fits a many, lends itself to good hysterics. Read it and weap.

Being interested in the legality of Lincoln calling on troops to supress a domestic and not a foreign threat is appealing to me, since it was, what I thought, a violation of the powers of the presidency. Grabbing this, I thought it might bring aboveboard his actions. The title is somewhat deceieving in that the first 4 1/2 chapters discuss the founding fathers and their ideaology on various presidential powers and states' rights: intriguing to read, but way too much history of the constitutional debates. Finishing the book, I came to realize this was the author's way of defending his conclusions: that Lincoln did not abuse his powers and acted within the bounderies of constitutional law (though the last chapter discussing Lincoln's enfringement on Free Speech is hard to swallow as legal.) Still a fascinating read on the topic of constitutional power,that is just as important today as it was then.

"Lincoln's Constitution" first examines the Constitution as Lincoln found it at the beginning of his administration, with emphasis on state - federal relations, including the right of secession. Like most modern legal scholars, Prof. Faber clearly sides with Lincoln on this (and most other constitutional issues), but he is also careful to show that believers in states' rights and secession had good historical reasons for their views. With this background, the author then examines the Constitutional issues Lincoln faced in dealing with the unprecedented challenge of waging the Civil War. Here the focus shifts to presidential war powers and civil liberties in time of war. The author points out where Lincoln was right (in light of later precedents) and where he was wrong. Again, the views of both his supporters and his critics are fully examined. Finally, Faber clearly explains the relevance of all these issues for citizens of our own time.
Authoritative, up-to-date and balanced, "Lincoln's Constitution" is an essential supplement to J.G. Randall's classic (but now dated) "Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln."

Farber takes the first amendment and in an easy to understand fashion explains how the Supreme Court interprets laws regarding our free speech as American Citizens.

Findlay and Farber treat environmental issues in this work that is a part of the "Nutshell" legal series. Law students snap these works up around exam time to make sure they haven't missed any valuable tidbits, and this book has that sort of "Cliff's Notes" feel to it -- that is, it is not an exhaustive environmental law treatise, but makes an excellent supplement to such treatises.

While well written and easy to follow, Farber and Sherry's book fails to provide their audience with an accurate picture of Critical Race Theory (CRT or "radical multiculturalism," as coined by the authors). They begin by only citing short conclusory statements made by CRT scholars and the authors never explore the reasoning behind the CRT scholars' conclusions. After curiously leaving this information out of their book, the authors then attack CRT, claiming it is based on story telling, as opposed to legal reasoning. CRT is based on logical premises and reasoning, Farber and Sherry just fail to acknowledge it. Instead of critically engaging and challenging the authenticity of CRT- they merely dismiss it as anti-Semitic, irrational, and emotionally charged. The authors also neglect to explore other plausible explanations for the success of Asians or Jews, that is not anti-Semitic or anti-Asian in nature.

For anyone interested in the topic, it is crucial that you consult with Professor Deborah Malamud's response to the assertion that CRT is inherently anti-Semitic (Please see "The Jew Taboo," 59 Ohio St.L.J. 915). Another review of Farber and Sherry worth reading is by Professor Beverly Horsburgh (Please see "The Myth of a Model Minority: The Transformation of Knowledge into Power," 10 UCLA Women's L.J. 165).

While this book provided a valuable insight to the psychology and motives of the multiculturalist left, a good deal of its content was tied up in polemics. It gives a clear image of the effects and sources of the current attack on reality that has emerged from university philosophy departments and proceeds to infiltrate our legal system like a subtle swamp monster. For the reader who is not familiar with the origins of multiculturalism, it provides a sound history and family tree for the movement.

Much of the book is involved in critiquing the ideas of racial and feminist activists and the implications multiculturalism has for American individualism. Particular attention is paid to its implications regarding racism towards minorities who have been successful in America, such as Asians and Jews. On the whole, a good criticism of a dangerous trend, but lacking in real cohesiveness and counterargument.

With a clarity and unpretentious use of language, with thoughtful supply of definitions, and the presentation of a methodical and structured argument Farber and Sherry take on the obscurantism and pretentious polemics of post-modern "scholarship". While their arguments and marshalling of facts are impressive, their style and form is also exemplary of the best in Western enlightened tradition. Very strongly recommended.