This excellent little book tries to find a middle ground between the judicial activism advocated by Ronald Dworkin, for example, and the strict original intent approach eloquently defended by Robert Bork. Philosophy of jurisprudence is not always a concept easily grasped, however. In the first chapter, Ely takes us through the discussion of where and how judges drive their activist approach through the door. Ely agrees that the due process clause of the constitution is not the place where an activist jurist should hang his hat. The due process clause, he argues, is concerned strictly with procedural matters, though it can be forcefully enforced within that context. Likewise, he argues, the 14th amendment, with its equality clause and privileges and immunities clause, also has been used to broadly expand judicial oversight on a number of issues. Again, Ely dissents by arguing that the 9th amendment is the more appropriate vehicle because of the procedure issue that constrains the due process clause as well in the 14th amendment.

Judicial review must be rooted in some kind of context - but the noninterpretivist must choose, traditionally, from a long list of inadequate places: individual values of a jurist is inadequate; natural law is vague, as is moral philosophy generally; consensus is imprecise and debatable and neutral principle is damn near impossible to define. He roots his own support of Warren court in participation, which is rooted in our very notion of democracy. His phrase: "participatory responsiveness." We need not grasp at high moral claims to justify supporting civil rights, but in the simple idea that what is available to the majority, must be equally available to the minority. They must be allowed to participate equally, he seems to be arguing, a notion that is easily found in our own legal and constitutional history.

Next Ely walks us through the ways we might address specific issues within his theoretical approach, such as free speech, which need not be defended always in the broadest terms, but might be better addressed as a procedural or participatory issue - that is to say, if the court acts to limit free speech, it is best to do so through categories of unprotected speech rather than appealing to abstract rights or dangers, such as Holmes did when he spoke of imminent danger. (I hope I am following him here). He also addresses the issue of apportionment, and again seeks to have the court avoid such political entanglements by searching for the best way to allow all citizens the right to participate in our democracy - and one person, one vote became the only tenable way to do so. Ely includes in chapter 4 a short but helpful review of the constitution in which he discusses the document for what it is - not an abstract or ideological document, but rather a governing tool that seeks to protect a system, not push an ideological agenda. I wish he had added specific cases and shown how he might have handled them through his approach, particularly tough cases like abortion, for example. THe last chapter rambles a bit and is hard to follow but this is an interesting book, given that the hotly debated issue about judicial activism continues.

John Ely's masterpiece on the the proper scope of judicial review is a must-read for anyone interested in the Supreme Court or just law in general. In short, Ely feels the Court should limit its power to assuring adequate access to the political process for all and not to giving answers to substantive issues such as abortion, affirmative action, economic rights, etc. In short, the book is a strong defense of the activism of the Warren Court (Ely clerked for Chief Justice Earl Warren and the book is dedicated to his memory). Though the emphasis on the work of the Warren Court may make the book seem a little outdated, the book is nevertheless relevant since it provides a partial justification for the abandonment of substantive due process that conservatives such as Antonin Scalia and Robert Bork have argued for in the 80's and 90's while at the same time defending certain types of judicial activism (for example, in voting rights or gay rights cases) that appeal to liberals. Though Ely's insights into constitutional law are brilliant (his corpus of law review articles from the 70's, many of which form the foundation for this book, provides some of the most well-thought arguments on many diverse areas of constitutional scholarship), his arguments are not without their weakpoints (though you may have to read the book a few times to find them- not a bad idea in any case). Specifically, the manner in which he derives his so-called "representation reinforcement" theory is problematic. It seems to be somewhat of a non sequiter to argue, as he does, that since one of the main themes of constitutional development has been the extension of access to the political process (in the form of the extension of the franchise, abolition of the federal poll tax, etc), the Court's should use such a development as a cue for how to read the Constitution. It not only seems to cheapen the amendment process, but also begs the question of why more democracy is desirable. In addition, Ely's theory of equal protection depends upon a good deal of psychology (trying to read the feelings that motivated legislators and their constituents) that sometimes leaves you scratching your head. While the arguments of the book are not perfect, it would be a mistake to think that any of them are severe enough to detract from the sum total of the wisdom contained in this unparalleled piece of legal scholarship.

Professor John Hart Ely's "Democracy and Distrust" is, quite simply, one of the great books about American constitutional law. Ely's task, to come up with a cohesive and coherent theory for judicial review, is far from a simple task, and yet his writing is so smooth and easy that the task *seems* easy. It is relatively easy to summarize Ely's general theory in few words. He argues that the American process is essentially democratic and that the role of the courts should be to police that process. In particular, Ely focuses on the voting-rights amendments, the First Amendment (as speech is essential to a free and open democracy), and the protection of "discrete and insular minorities."

What is perhaps most startling about Ely's work is that, despite the fact that he comes from what may accurately be termed a liberal perspective, he rejects fundamental values as a means of making constitutional law. This rejection is particularly surprising in that so many of the liberal constitutional advances have come in the name of fundamental values. Yet Ely makes his case persuasively, listing and rejecting many of the possible bases for such values (from natural law to the judges' own values to consensus, e.g.).

"Democracy and Distrust" is an eminently accessible book for anyone with even a small background in constitutional law. Though the book would probably be beyond the ken of high-school students or college undergraduates without any exposure to legal thought, certainly no degree in law is required to understand the book. Ely aptly avoids excessive legal jargon and outlines his theory in language designed to persuade, not to impress.

If there is any criticism of "Democracy and Distrust" (and there is), it is that Ely presents his theory nearly in a vacuum. There are most assuredly other theories of judicial review, many of which are quite different from Ely's (to the point, almost, that one suspects there must be more than one Constitution to produce such disparate theories). In addition, there are clearly parts of the Constitution that are not directly concerned with democracy (the Fourth Amendment, for example, which Ely only mentions in passing), and the theory in this book cannot be comprehensive for failure to accommodate these parts of the Constitution.

For anyone with an interest in constitutional law, Ely should be required reading.

The unusual writing style of the author makes this book hard to follow for me, but it seems to be one of those things that what seems quirky to me could make perfect sense to another person. He uses uncommon english phrases and displays quite a colorful vocabulary.

For sheer readability, I believe that books should be written logically and in a plain english style. It does not flow as well as it could, and I believe he could use the services of a good editor. However, if you can plod through it, it contains gold nuggets of information. I found techniques in this book that I believe will be invaluable, and they're not available elsewhere (I've bought almost every book there is on law school and law school exams). The book is worth every penny and more.

This book was invaluable to me. I was able to work throughout the semester in anticiaption of the exams and was very prepared for what I faced at exam time. It is tru that professors DO NOT prepare you in class for the exams and than I credit my good grades with the very concrete and incvaluable advice from Professor Delaney in his book.
It is NOT out of print and is available at johndelaneypub.com.

A goldmine. DON'T tell your fellow law students about this book (if they're in your graduating class). During my first semester of law school, I got mostly Cs and one B. My second semester grades, after studying this book during the semester: 3 As and 2 B+s.

Moonshiner's Gold is a good adventure story with an interesting plot, but is most suited for middle school age. It is a very fast read and leaves you feeling good about the outcome of the book and life in general. As a high school senior, I found this book to be a little low level for me. I was often bored with the simple words and grammer used. For a fourteen-year-old, however, it would be a great book.

Although Moonshiner's Gold is build with an old time western-type plot, it has a modern feel to it. The action is well planned out and it is written well. The book flows from one setting to another making it feel like you are riding along with the main character. Overall, Moonshiner's Gold is a fun, simple book meant for a younger audience, yet still enjoyable for adults.

My daughter is a big Hank the Cowdog fan. I started buying the books on cassette because I couldn't read the things to her out loud because I was laughting too hard. However, after 30+ books they get a little tiring.

Now Mr. Erickson has written something with more substance and I must say I'm impressed. I bought this book on audio tape to listen to with my 7 year old daughter in the car. I really enjoyed it and my daughter was instantly hooked by it. Though I would think boys will enjoy it more than girls, my daughter is already requesting that we listen to it again. It is a rousing adventure story with lots of humor. I hope Mr. Erickson is busy writing more books for the older child (and us adults)to enjoy.

I like to be surprised and I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this little treasure. I suspect that this book with the un-cool title and pulp-western cover will get overlooked by the publisher, press, and the public. It is a gem of a story to share with your kids or to read for your own enjoyment.

Reading it reminded me of the hours I spent with the Hardy Boys as a kid and as a father reading them again to my children. There is only one difference: "Moonshiner's Gold" is really well written. Built on a tried-and-true western plot of "save the family ranch," the author has populated the tale with interesting characters and set it in a time and place balanced on the edge of on the old west and the modern world.

The story unfolds in the Texas Panhandle of 1927. The mixture of horses and cars, traditional ranch life and oil boom town society is fascinating. Mr. Erickson combines a ne'er-do-well Grandpa, a widowed mom, an adventurous teen, skulking moonshiners, hidden gold, the Texas Rangers, and skunk-nabbing to weave this entertaining yarn.

this book was hard to understand. everyone thinks Mr. Zuckert is very good at being smart and at saying smart things. This is probably true, he seems very smart. But he should act less smart in his undergraduate government courses, it alienates his students. thank you

Zuckert's book covers three different topics: the philosophical meaning of the Declaration of Independence's paragraphs regarding natural rights; Jefferson's personal views on natural rights; and the interplay between Locke's natural rights philosophy, the Whig political tradition, the Pilgrim/Puritan tradition and classical republican thought in the history and philosophy of America's founders. Zuckert argues cogently that natural rights philosophy was the strongest motivating force in the founders' view. Zuckert's book presumes some knowledge, but sets forth arguments thoroughly enough for the non-expert to understand. He also writes clear prose. All in all, an excellent book for anyone interested in the history or philosophy of the American founding.

This is a profound and important work. Zuckert analyzes in depth the history and development of republican ideology, revealing much that is new and refuting much that has been assumed in the past. He identifies three distinct strains of republican thought, Protestant, Grotian, and Lockean. He conducts an in depth examination of John Milton and Hugo Grotius, with special emphasis on their similarities with Locke. In addition, he rebuts a good deal of the inane nonsense that has been passed off as ideological scholarship for the past three decades. In particular, he virtually destroys the theories of J.G.A. Pocock and his band of followes, including Gordon Wood. On a side note, he manages to rescue Bernard Bailyn from his categorization as a "Republican revisionist" by showing how much he really differs from Pocock et al. Following this, he painstakingly examines John Locke's thought. His findings are fresh and challenging. More importantly, he explains just how original he was and subsequently just why he was so important. To top it all off, he takes a look a"Cato's Letters," showing how the authors managed to synthesize Lockean liberalism with republicanism, producing one of the most brilliant works in the history of political philosophy. Despite its general brilliance, I do have some misgivings about certain aspects of the work. Although I certainly acknowledge the importance of Lockean ideas, I have to say that Lockean ideas are not necessarily found in Locke alone. One individual in particular, Algernon Sidney, expressed many Lockean ideas before Locke, and his works were widely influential throughout England and America. Beyond this and a few other quibbles, this book is virtually flawless. If one is interested in the issues at hand, this work is an absolute must.

Having just finished this over this past weekend. I think that it is a great read if you can get around the toss around the author makes of past and present in the story. That is the only reason that i didn't give it a 5. The story is about a young man who join the USMC and became an aviator and flew during Vietnam. The other story here is one of the same man 20yrs down the line in a defense contractor and realizing that his boss is robbing the government and the company with some future aircraft that can't preform the job. In both he faces tough choices of going on or quitting. A lot of humor in here as well. Good for a few laugh.

I just put aside everything to read John Keene's "Pettibone's Law". I wanted to finish it before his memorial on January 28th, 2000.

The book was complicated and sad, quirky and smart, packed with intelligence...much the way I remember John Keene when I met him briefly over twenty years ago.

It's been said that the Viet Nam war produced the best war literature ever written, mainly because some guys who fought the war were also able to really write about it. Well, John Keene was one of those, and he scores right on the target with "Pettibone's Law". It's written with humor and pathos and confirms what I always suspected about that war, but never knew.

It's a good read, and it's not lightweight so if you're looking for fluff, skip it. It is a must-read, though, for anyone who's interested in a good book that deals with truth and abandoning illusions about war. Yes, it's fiction, but which great fiction isn't based on truth?

Thank God "Pettibone's Law" got written. The book shares a kinship with "Catch 22", etching into our consciousness what it was like being a fighter pilot in Viet Nam. You can't help but laugh, you can't help but cry.

Oh yes, there is one chapter towards the end that's philosophical and a bit difficult to read, (I guess John wanted to have his say about a few things) but when I finished the book a few chapters later I cried genuine tears for Old Jack Rawlins with his pork "hanging out".

I recommend this book without hesitation.

Keene tells the story of a F-4 jock in terms that only one who has "een there -- done that"could write it. Some of the best humor encountered in ages, mixed with true pathos many Nam vets will recognize and wish they could have put their finger on it with such stark clarity.

Keene often refers to "he other war."A vet's personal war within, and it is in this capacity that Pettibone's Law touches so many nerves. A really excellent read for both the witty humor and the mirror it holds up for any combat veteran -- but especially the Nam vet.

Pettibone's Law is the SEA veteran's "atch 22,"and is every bit the classic that is Heller's WWII-based masterpiece.

BDA (Bomb Damage Assessment) 100% from a Nam FAC who may have, unknowing to both, controlled John Keene in a different world and life so far away, yet so everpresent still. Pettibone's Law is dead center and a top shelf keeper.

Lars Tvede has managed to give his readers what most students of economics never get during their studies: a highly readable and entertaining overview about the way economic knowledge has progressed through time, and the way historic events (yes, wars, bubbles, etc.) have shaped the development of economics. The book is well researched and written in a very enjoyable style. If you are tired with short-term GDP forecasts and would like to have a look at the "big picture", this book is definitely for you.

The only reason this book doesn't get five stars are the last chapters about chaos theory, which are a bit "sticky", but nevertheless provide some interesting insights into some of the most recent developements of modern economic theory. Enjoy your reading

Well written, clear, conise and informative. The first book on economic history that actually encouraged me to turn the page. The theory is explained clearly, but not simply, and the backgroud is interesting and readable. Even if you have no interest in economics this book is well worth the read, it will give you a fuller understanding of how things work, and why.

For those who wish to read a biography of our greatest chief justice, this is not the book to read. For those who are interested in the jurisprudence of C.J. Marshall, this book provides an outstanding introduction. The book provides compelling, and accurate, evidence that in addition to John Marshall being a great jurist, he was also, and foremost, a founding father -- one of the few who realized the potential for our great nation. While it can be successfully argued that at times Marshall expanded the powers of the Supreme Court beyond those intended by the authors of the Constitution, the book also provides a compelling argument for the necessity of expanding those powers. Johnson successfully reasons that, where it not for Marshall's ability to occasionaly read "beyond" the strict guidelines of the Constitution, the role of judicial review (and hence our constitutional guarantees) would not exist today. Overall, an excellent study into a chief justice whose concerns where not those of partisanship -- but rather those of aiding a fledgling country through its formative years.

Let me first confess that I am the named research aide who assisted Professor Johnson on this book. But what I didn't have anything to do with was his useful organization of the caselaw into topical segments. Not only is this book a useful work for the reasons stated by the other reviewer(s), but if someone wants to know the Court's holdings over time in a number of areas, such as the law of nations or separation of powers, this is a useful book. Professor Johnson organizes the book so that a researcher may use it to glean trends on a particular topic rather than presenting a jumble of topics and leaving it up to the reader to discern the development of the law on a given issue.

I might also note that Professor Johnson's conducted meticulous research over many years organizing Supreme Court decisions by topic in a fashion only rivaled by West Publishing.

Entomology and the Law by Greenberg and Kunich was promoted to be "the first comprehensive book on forensic entomology." This book certainly does not live up to that description, though it is a decent book in its own rights. At [the price], the book seems a little thin and incomplete.

The first section of the book, written by Dr. Greenberg, deals with the history, biology, identification, and use of forensically important flies. Dr. Greenberg's knowledge of flies is indeed extensive, and he has included keys to species of adults and larvae (pupae are ignored) of carrion flies from many parts of the world. Note that only flies are covered in this book, and all of the other forensically important insects are ignored. Also there is no mention of insect succession on the corpse outside of the preface to the first section of the book. This aspect alone limits the application of this book to the early postmortem interval.

The second section of the book, written by John Kunich, focuses on the legal applications of forensic entomology. This section deals with the laws behind scientific evidence, the admissibility of insect evidence, and how to optimize the use of such evidence. Placing the legal aspects into the prospective of forensic entomology made this section useful to the scientist who is interested in that aspect of the criminal justice system alone.

This book is far from being comprehensive. Nowhere are the details of the collection of entomological evidence presented, successional patterns of insects are largely ignored, and the temperature information included in the book is incomplete. Though lawyers and entomologists with experience in the field of medicocriminal entomology will benefit from this book, the curious lay person or law enforcement official should save their money and purchase either Catts & Haskell or Byrd & Castner.

This book has it all. If ever a book crossed the lines of genre from a working guide for a professional in his field to an interesting read for the inquisitive mind, this book is it. This book is for the professional who has anything to do with a murder scene or wrongful death situation. This book is for everyone who watches television because "Entomology and the Law" is the marriage of a great murder mystery crossed with an investigatory courtroom drama. This book is for every litigator who wants to effectively use the law of scientific evidence in the courtroom. This book is for the layman who wants to know more. You see, it's about bugs. Gross bugs. Flys actually, and the fact that flys can be accurately used to identify the time and location of death. Interesting? Yes. Easy read? No. Necessary read? DEFINITELY.

ENTOMOLOGY AND THE LAW is the definitive book on forensic entomology we've been asking for. Kunich and Greenberg are an
unbeatable "Dream Team" when it comes to combining the law and the science. Everything anyone might need to know about forensic
entomology is in this book. For the scientists/expert witnesses, the "Father of Forensic Entomology", Dr. Bernard
Greenberg, provides a meticulous, highly detailed, and comprehensive guide to using insect-related evidence to determine the time of death in homicide cases. No one in the world knows more about the science and practice of forensic
entomology than Dr. Greenberg, and he has memorialized his decades of research and experience in this volume, the crowning achievement of his unsurpassed career. And for the attorneys who litigate these difficult cases, and who must either prepare or cross-examine the expert witnesses, Law Professor and Harvard Law School graduate John Kunich spells out all of the intricacies of the law of scientific evidence, use of expert witnesses, and specific strengths and weaknesses of forensic entomology evidence in court. ETOMOLOGY AND THE LAW will be indispensable for litigators and scientists all over the world, because of the information it contains on admissibility of scientific evidence in nations other than the United States. Even laypersons will enjoy this book, especially the millions of viewers of the hit television show "C.S.I. (Crime Scene Investigation)," which often features forensic entomology in its dramas. What a rare and sublime union of law and science this book is!

John Rawl's "Law of People" is divided into two parts: "The Law of Peoples" (a paper based on Rawl's article by the same name published in 1993), and "The Idea of Public Reason Revisited" (1997).

First of all, don't make the same mistake as I did by thinking that this short book (200+ pages) would be "a quick summer reading" - because it's not.

John Rawl's book is on a very high reading level. The amount of research that went into "Law of peoples" is quite evident from both its extensive endnotes, and the general wordiness.

I find the topic itself interesting, but I found the reading of this book as achingly dry as the Sahara desert at high noon. This is certainly not the book to bring for your weekend trip.

Still, "Law of peoples" contains much interesting stuff, and I imagine it would be a valuable read for the hard-core student of political liberalism/liberal democracy/related topics...

John Rawls believes that we can achieve something akin to a utopia. Although precious few utopian thinkers have escaped the disreputable taint of astonishing naiveté, Rawls has thought hard about the moral, religious, cultural, and historical nuances that so often make utopic claims tragically optimistic. His own vision of a realistic political utopia rests in his faith in the idea of a social contract; the essays collected in these volumes present Rawls' lifework as a consistent project of extending and radicalizing this venerable idea.

Earlier Rawls articulated several general principles--for example, "justice as fairness," and "public reason"--that he thinks justify political relations between members of constitutional democracy. In this book he presents an even more general principle, "the law of peoples," that he thinks would extends the social contract to include members of certain illiberal societies.

Readers interested in Rawls' latest views about the real-world prospects of his realistic utopia will welcome this short book. In addition to presenting a long essay about his most general political principle, that of the "law of peoples," this book also includes a shorter new essay on Rawls' influential conception of "public reason" within liberal democracy. In both, Rawls is very much concerned with showing how his lifelong project-to bring into fruitful synthesis our deepest communal insights about reasonableness and justice-justify his faith in a realistic utopia. Rawls' congenial prose style makes his dazzling vision accessible to all conscientious readers.

John Rawls is indisputably the most honorable spokesman of political liberalism of the past twenty-five years. His theoretical committment to and devlopment of liberalism is an inspiring attempt to reconcile the difficulties inherent in a heterogenous society in which different conceptions of the good life and varied value systems, beliefs, and principles can coexist and yet affirm the political conception of a constitutional regime. How can a nation entreat its inhabitants to carve out their conception of the good life and their own value systems and yet achieve agreement on a set of principles that all citizens may abide by? It is the answer to this question that Rawls's works have sought to answer. The Law of Peoples is no less concerned with this question. Rawls's attempts to extend a social contractarian approach to human existence on the international level is thorough and nuanced. Liberal peoples, he argues, have three basic features. They possess a reasonably just constitutional democractic government that serves their fundamental interests; they are united by common sympathies; and above all, they have a morally mature nature. Critics who claim that Rawls's brand of liberalism invites a form of moral agnosticism had better think twice. Moral maturity and its genetic antecedent--human moral nature, are the preconditions that underly the moral basis of liberalism in general: deep respect for human beings and the necessity of treating them as ends in themselves. Rawls's development of a Just War Doctrine should force us to re-think traditional concepts of sovereignty and undermines the claims to legitimacy that outlaw states seek to impose on moral communities in the name of cultural authenticity. In this respect Rawls' work is indispensible to young liberal scholar's such as myself. In fact I have depended on his theoretical approach to ground much of my highly controversial and hotly contested book, "Becoming a Cosmopolitan: What It Means To be a Human Being in the New Millennium." I argue, however, for a more pugnacious form of liberalism by rejecting outright, as conceptions of the good, all forms of tribal (racial/ethnic and national)identities and argue for the obliteration of all cultural practices that undermine human rights. For those who believe that moral progress is possible and who wish to further advance the idea that liberal democracies represent a superior and more evolved form of social and political living, The Law of Peoples is a detailed and rigorous application of this idea.

I read this book beacause I wanted to learn more about the Scopes Trial. It is well written and provides an excellent background to the circumstances that led up to the Scopes Trial. Nevertheless, I do not agree with the popular myth advocated in this book, that evolution is factual science and biblical creation is for out-of-date, ignorant, old-fashioned people. I would recommend this book for the purpose of obtaining a solid background knowledge of the Scopes Trial. It is informing, succinct and very interesting.

This book is an excellent summary of the famous Scopes trial of 1925, in which the fundamentalists who wanted to keep Darwin's theory of evolution out of the schools went up against the great Clarence Darrow, who embarrased the opposing lawyer, William Jennings Bryan. The book is solidly researched and well written and also features some nice pictures of the courtroom proceedings.

I really became absorbed in this book about the legendary Scopes Trial, which had to do with whether evolution ought to be allowed to be taught in schools. First, it is very factual and well written. Second, it has a lot of great photos taken during the trial itself. These made the subject really come to life for me. The book has made me want to go out and find more books on the subject.