America's Constitution: A Biography

by Akhil Reed Amar

Book Overview

In America's Constitution , one of this era's most accomplished constitutional law scholars, Akhil Reed Amar, gives the first comprehensive account of one of the world's great political texts.... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1400062624
• ISBN13: 9781400062621
• Release Date: September 2005
• Publisher: Random House (NY)
• Length: 657 Pages
• Weight: 2.29 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.6" x 6.5" x 9.5"

Customer Reviews

Some good... Some bad.

I purchased this books in hopes of expanding my knowledge of the Constitution. In some ways it did just that. In some ways this book was totally opposite of period history books. An example would be of Amar's conclusion that because of the "more perfect Union" statement in the Preamble, no state had (has) the right to seceded. I would say that the Preamble has no governing authority. Also, Article 1 Sec. 10 tells us what states who are members of the Constitutional compact cannot do. Secession is not listed. The 10th Amendment so states that what isn't "prohibited" to the States, is a power of the States. Madison has furthered this point by saying the central government's power were limited, but that States powers were "numerous and indefinite." Nowhere in the Constitution is secession prohibited and nowhere did the voluntary Union become involuntary. Amar did give an excellent description of the judiciary, its original Constitutional powers, and how this particular branch has expanded its powers, (without consulting the ones who gave them the power...the people). Because of Amar's more modernized theory of "We The People" as a whole, instead of " We The People" of the States, I give this book a middle ground rating of 3 stars.

great intro to the constitution

Amar explains in his postscript that his aim in writing this book was "to offer a comprehensive account of America's Constitution, introducing the reader both to the legal text (and its consequences) and to the political deeds that gave rise to that text." He has achieved this aim splendidly. This phrase-by-phrase guided tour through the document never fails to inform and provoke, whether or not one agrees with its author (and I don't always). It's also a very approachable book, in terms of both style and content. The knowledge base assumed here is considerable, but not forbidding: anybody with a good working knowledge of the Seven Articles and the better-known Amendments ought to be able to thread his way profitably through Amar's lucid and energetic narrative. Amar considers himself a "textualist," which as far as I can tell amounts to a kind of principled "public-meaning" originalism of the kind advocated by Oliver Wendell Holmes and Robert Bork. His (very) close reading of the text is always informed by a knowledge of the range of plausible meanings available to 18th-century users of a given word or phrase, and generally (with some crucial exceptions--see below) by a comprehensive familiarity with the historical circumstances that led to the adoption of that word or phrase. At the same time, he stresses that the source of the Constitution's meaning must be located in the stated AND UNSTATED intentions of the document's authors AND RATIFIERS, to the extent that those intentions can be reliably recovered. In itself, this is an admirable approach; it avoids both the pitfalls of crude authorial-intent originalism (i.e., interpreting the Constitution by pretending to read James Madison's mind) and those of "loose constructionism" (i.e., interpreting the Constitution to mean anything we can plausibly strong-arm the text into saying), and we feel we are in the presence of an honest and well-informed guide whose ideological commitments take a back seat to his desire to share what he knows. It's also refreshing to encounter a politically liberal philosopher of law who unabashedly cares about literal meaning and authors' and ratifiers' intent--thus giving the lie to the silly claim that interpretive philosophy is a mere function of political orientation. The devil is in the details, however, and Amar has his share of hits and misses. I'll give one example of each. The virtues of Amar's textualism are very much in evidence in his analysis of the Preamble. Contrasting the ratification process of the Articles of Confederation with that of the Constitution, Amar persuasively argues not only that the Union formed under the Constitution was legally indissoluble by unilateral secession, but that it was so understood by its authors and ratifiers. He secures this result by a close reading of the phrase "more perfect union": the proposal of such a union, Amar demonstrates, was based at least in part on the legal (and legally indissoluble) union of England an

The thematics of liberal originalism

This is that rare book. Anyone interested in the history of the United States or it's government should read this book. Not necessarily because it settles anything but because it argues so well for positions that are not mainstream. You ignore Amar at the risk of your own ignorance. Two things about the reading of this book. Read the Postscript both before and after the main text. This will greatly clarify your understanding of Amar's purpose and methodology. Also, make sure to religiously read the footnotes. Much of the supporting data is to be therein as well as cogent outlines of many a scholarly debate. Amar has two major overarching themes: 1. "...the Founder's Constitution was more democratic, more slavocratic and more geostrategically inspire than is generally recognized..." (p.471). 2. Amar focuses on the various acts of constitutional ratification and amendment as being maybe more important than the text itself. His working of this last point is continually brilliant. For example, Amar focuses a lot on how Washington established many a precedent for the President. "This seemed particularly appropriate because the American people in 1787-1789 understood that the Constitutuion was designed for Washington, whose precedent-setting actions would...help concretize its meaning..." (p. 479 but see also p.134) Another example has been mentioned by some of the other reviewers but is worth repeating. Amar points out that the vote for the delegates to the ratification conventions in the various states were more inclusive than usual. The Founders recognized that the legitimacy of the Constitution rested on popular sovreignity. In their cover letter to Congress presenting the Constitution, they explicitely called for the ratification by convention. The people of the states had copies of the Constitution to study and discuss before the election and the election was only about the delegates to be selected for the conventions. "A vote for convention delegates thus approximated a direct rederendum on the document..." (p.308). Amar makes powerful arguments about his slavocratic thesis as well. He explores the full political effects of the three-fifths clause not just on the make-up of the Congress but on the electoral college (where overrepresentation of the South gave the Presidency to Jefferson in 1800). Like Sean Wilentz in his recent The Rise of Democracy, Amar also notes the way that the three-fifths clause was adapted by Southern states into their own constitutions were it warped their own internal politics in favor of the Slavocrats (most especially, South Carolina). About the geostrategic implications of the Founder's Constitution, I refer the reader to my review of Max Edling's A Revolution in Favor of Government. Edling's book is a well-developed exploration of this thesis. One more point about the Founding. Amar's discussion of the nationalistic implications of the Preamble are worth the price of the book alone. One of the reviewers below wonde

A holistic view of the Constitution

Constitutional scholars are familiar with the quality and innovation of Amar's previous works and this brilliant new book will not disappoint. Of course, some will react negatively to the very title. By calling it a "biography," many scholars will immediately be hostile because it implies a "living" Constitution, which means "judicial activism." Amar uses biography because the Constitution is a living entity, and his account looks at its "birth" in 1787 through its maturation (i.e. amendments) up to the present. The sheer immensity of this project is overwhelming. Amar examines the meaning of nearly every provision of the Constitution. He looks at the document from a holistic perspective, seeking to incorporate the best elements of legal, historical, and political science scholarship in order to achieve a full representation of its meaning. While the length of this work is impossible to summarize in this short review, some things should be noted as particularly original. Amar highlights the interesting fact that the original Constitution was ratified in a more democratic and popular way then is commonly supposed; most states removed the suffrage limitations and allowed near universal (white) male suffrage. Another point of interest is the emphasis of geostrategic security and the related issue of unilateral succession, which Amar argues was not constitutionally permissive. This is only the tip of the iceberg, and I highly recommend this book. Amar's writing style is engaging and capable of understanding even by the layperson who does not have an obsession with the Constitution. For those, like myself, who are constitutionally obsessed, Amar presents refreshing and innovative approaches to many constitutional provisions, some of which modern scholars tend to ignore. I was pleased to see that Amar noted in his postscript certain limitations to his study that I became concerned of during my reading. First, the meaning he describes is his own opinion on the issue, and is often surprisingly tentative in its conclusion. This book is not constitutional gospel; it is intended to stir debate and critical disagreement, of which there are multiple assertions capable of attack; for example, I find his argument that "commerce" was understood to encompass interactions not limited to economics unconvincing. Second, and more important, is his admission that his account emphasizes the written constitution and largely ignores the unwritten (or, more properly, unenacted) portions of our constitution, such as judicial interpretation, foundational statutes, and norms and practices of our system. I sincerely hope that someone, perhaps even Amar, takes up his call for another book on this unwritten aspect of our constitutional tradition.

An in-depth study of the constitution and how it should be interpreted in contemporary society

While President Bush spent the month of August at his Crawford, Texas ranch, various newspaper accounts mused over the list of books that were part of the President's summer reading. Several times during Mr. Bush's summer sojourn, he spoke to Americans and Iraqis alike regarding the ongoing debate and negotiations over the new Iraqi constitution. One wishes that the President had received an advance copy of Akhil Reed Amar's AMERICA'S CONSTITUTION to include on his summer reading list. At this critical time for the fledgling nation of Iraq, as well as for American citizens, the President would have been well served to consider the message of this exhaustive clause-by-clause analysis of one of the most important documents of world history. Indeed, as the Iraqis struggle with the creation of their constitution, the President might consider sending a copy of AMERICA'S CONSTITUTION to each member of the Iraqi Parliament. Since 1985, Professor Amar has served as a constitutional law scholar on the faculty of Yale Law School. In 1998 he published THE BILL OF RIGHTS: Creation and Reconstruction, an important and provocative contribution to constitutional doctrine and interpretation. AMERICA'S CONSTITUTION continues the discussion that has come to the fore in American jurisprudential debate --- what does the constitution say and how should we interpret its meaning in contemporary society? As our nation prepares to add two new justices to the Supreme Court, the magnitude of this debate and its impact on our nation's future cannot be underestimated by any citizen. Not counting amendments, the U.S. Constitution has 4,400 words. It is the oldest and shortest constitution in the world. Considering that brevity, it may be difficult for readers to contemplate nearly 500 pages of line-by-line analysis of each provision of the Constitution. But Professor Amar's thorough and detailed analysis of the Constitution is so well-written and true to a fundamental theoretical argument that readers will be hard pressed to find any superfluous writing in this remarkable work of legal and historical scholarship. Space limitations make a detailed discussion of Amar's constitutional theology (his first chapter is titled "In the Beginning") impossible. The overriding argument of AMERICA'S CONSTITUTION is that certain key themes representing basic commitments of the founding fathers tie the Constitution together. Before discussing that argument it is crucial to consider Amar's discussion of important lessons gleaned from the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. That discussion is significant because of the important lessons it provides to the modern world where new nations such as Iraq struggle to write a document to provide for the growth of a fledgling nation. Regardless of one's political views on the war in Iraq, only imprudent individuals would view the ongoing drafting of a Constitution for that nation without reference to historical context. Professor Amar