I’m a judicial junkie. It’s a recent realization. While I didn’t go to law school and will never go to law school, I enjoy books that easily break down legal arguments, track the history of the court, and provide context for laws’ applications in American life.
Since I saw that John Paul Stevens has a new book out this month, I decided it was time to work through his previous two books. This week I finished the first: Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir. Stevens is our second-longest serving Justice to the Supreme Court, and has an interesting voting record. He was appointed by Gerald Ford, and throughout his time serving on the bench, he moved from being one of the most conservative judges to one of the most liberal. Ford, before his death, noted appointing Stevens to the bench as his proudest moment of his presidency.
~~
Stevens died recently. In all honesty, I wrote the first two paragraphs of this review three months ago, before his death. I stopped halfway through the drafting, in my usual fashion, to mull over my thoughts. Someday I will right a self-review on my inability to finish…anything. But back to Stevens.
This book was tremendous. It removed much of the veil of the Supreme Court secrecy for the average reader. The decorum and procedure gets an explanation. What makes the Chief Justice the chief? What’s it like when a Justice retires? How are the offices assigned to the Justices? I love these tidbits of Supreme Court procedure. Stevens isn’t just writing for this purpose though (although I would be completely content if he did). His purpose of writing this book seems more clear in his analysis of judicial decisions. He is critical of his counterparts’ decisions, and is direct in his assessment of the written opinions. This book is mapped out by the five chiefs he lived through (from Vinson to Roberts). Some of it is a slog, especially when he gets deep into the evolution of sovereignty and “justice” as a word. But it’s a wonderfully pleasant book to read if you enjoy Supreme Court history, law for non-lawyers, or the evolution of our legal framework.
With Five Justices, Stevens explored the court and decisions. This laid a foundation for his second book: Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution. In this, he lays a legal framework for changing six amendments to the Constitution. Some of these are directed squarely at the mistakes of his Supreme Court cohorts. Others, he determines, rest in the Legislative branch. As a reader of the left-leaning persuasion, I wouldn’t disagree with any of the changes. From gun control to voters rights improvements, all the changes are rational and justified. He answers the “how do we do it”. The hardest part of this book is the fact that these things haven’t been done yet.
I still need to read his final book The Making of a Justice which I believe is more a record of him than an analysis of the law. Sometimes I worry that we will never again have a person like John Paul Stevens on the court. I enjoy everything he offers readers, and the legacy he left us.
All Things Emily 