Millions of Americans were baffled and outraged by the U.S. Supreme Court's role in deciding the presidential election of 2000 with its controversial ruling in Bush v. Gore. The Court had held a unique place in our system of checks and balances, seen as the embodiment of fairness and principle precisely because it was perceived to be above the political fray. How could it now issue a decision that reeked of partisan politics, and send to the White House a candidate who may have actually lost the election? In Supreme Injustice , best-selling author and legal expert Alan M. Dershowitz addresses these questions head-on, at last demystifying Bush v. Gore for those who are still angered by the court's decision but unclear about its meaning. Dershowitz--himself a former Supreme Court clerk--argues that in this case for the first time, the court's majority let its desire for a particular partisan outcome have priority over legal principles. As in his other bestselling books, Dershowitz clarifies complex legal issues, explaining concepts such as "equal protection" and "irreparable harm." Digging deeply into their earlier writings and rulings, Dershowitz proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the justices who gave George W. Bush the presidency contradicted their previous positions to do so. The most egregious ruling since the Dred Scott Decision, Bush v. Gore has shattered the image of the Supreme Court as a fair and impartial arbiter of important national issues. The resulting loss of the American people's respect, Dershowitz concludes, has severely compromised the Court's role in national affairs. And yet Dershowitz sees some benefit emerging from this constitutional crisis--if we understand its lessons and take action to prevent it from happening again.
Review
"Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."-- The Washington Post Book World
"The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press
"This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." -- Library Journal
This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan politics."-- Booklist
About the Author
Alan M. Dershowitz is the bestselling author of Chutzpah, Reversal of Fortune, Reasonable Doubts , and many other books. After clerking for Judge David Bazelon and Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, Dershowitz was appointed to the Harvard Law Faculty, where he became a full professor at age 28, the youngest in the school's history. Business Week has described him as "one of [America's] most prominent legal educators." Long famous and infamous for defending controversial clients and positions, he is one of America's best known commentators on legal issues. His articles and syndicated columns appear regularly in newspapers and magazines, and he comments frequently on national television. Dershowitz lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Description:
Product Description
Millions of Americans were baffled and outraged by the U.S. Supreme Court's role in deciding the presidential election of 2000 with its controversial ruling in Bush v. Gore. The Court had held a unique place in our system of checks and balances, seen as the embodiment of fairness and
principle precisely because it was perceived to be above the political fray. How could it now issue a decision that reeked of partisan politics, and send to the White House a candidate who may have actually lost the election?
In Supreme Injustice , best-selling author and legal expert Alan M. Dershowitz addresses these questions head-on, at last demystifying Bush v. Gore for those who are still angered by the court's decision but unclear about its meaning. Dershowitz--himself a former Supreme Court clerk--argues
that in this case for the first time, the court's majority let its desire for a particular partisan outcome have priority over legal principles. As in his other bestselling books, Dershowitz clarifies complex legal issues, explaining concepts such as "equal protection" and "irreparable harm."
Digging deeply into their earlier writings and rulings, Dershowitz proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the justices who gave George W. Bush the presidency contradicted their previous positions to do so.
The most egregious ruling since the Dred Scott Decision, Bush v. Gore has shattered the image of the Supreme Court as a fair and impartial arbiter of important national issues. The resulting loss of the American people's respect, Dershowitz concludes, has severely compromised the Court's role in
national affairs. And yet Dershowitz sees some benefit emerging from this constitutional crisis--if we understand its lessons and take action to prevent it from happening again.
Review
"Dershowitz's book is an all-out call to revolution against the high court....The first half of the book features a cogent and much-welcome summary of the claims advanced as the case called Bush vs. Gore worked its way up from the Florida courts. Making legal sense of the constitutional sausage
wrought by butterfly ballots, Vote-O-Matic machines and two conflicting provisions of Florida's election laws, Dershowitz places in context the intellectual outrage that was the high court's decision to stay the recount ordered the day before by the Florida Supreme Court."-- The Washington Post Book
World
"The Harvard law professor examines the Supreme Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential election and concludes that the court's decision reflected its desire for a particular partisan outcome and disregarded its principles. The result: The court might have sent to the White House a candidate
who actually lost the election."--Ron Berthel, The Associated Press
"This well-reasoned and controversial book asks central questions about American democracy and the role of citizens and courts in our society." -- Library Journal
This legal expert and best-selling author weighs in with his two-cents' worth on the subject of the 2000 presidential election. In unequivocal terms certain to generate discussion and debate, he finds the Supreme Court's involvement in the case to be a blatant example of partisan
politics."-- Booklist
About the Author
Alan M. Dershowitz is the bestselling author of Chutzpah, Reversal of Fortune, Reasonable Doubts , and many other books. After clerking for Judge David Bazelon and Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, Dershowitz was appointed to the Harvard Law Faculty, where he became a full professor at age 28,
the youngest in the school's history. Business Week has described him as "one of [America's] most prominent legal educators." Long famous and infamous for defending controversial clients and positions, he is one of America's best known commentators on legal issues. His articles and syndicated
columns appear regularly in newspapers and magazines, and he comments frequently on national television. Dershowitz lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.