First Among Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life

by Kenneth W. Starr

Book Overview

Today's United States Supreme Court consists of nine intriguingly varied justices and one overwhelming contradiction: Compared to its revolutionary predecessor, the Rehnquist Court appears deceptively passive, yet it stands as dramatically ready to defy convention as the Warren Court of the 1950s and 60s. Now Kenneth W. Starr-who served as clerk for one chief justice, argued twenty-five cases as solicitor general before the Supreme Court, and is widely...

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0446527564
• ISBN13: 9780446527569
• Release Date: October 2002
• Publisher: Grand Central Publishing
• Length: 352 Pages
• Weight: 1.30 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.1" x 6.3" x 9.3"

Customer Reviews

Superb Overview of our Supreme Court and its Jurisprudence

To write a one-volume summary about the US Supreme Court and its major lines of jurisprudence over the last fifty years is no easy task. Yet, Judge Kenneth Starr is more than up to the task in "First Among Equals," recently released in paperback. Starr is a brilliant legal mind and has had a stellar career in the law, whatever venomous nonsense you may have heard from James Carville. He brings his insight and experience into this book, writing a short introduction to some of the landmark cases during the tenure of the Great Chief Justice John Marshall, followed by short biographical sketches of the Court's current roster. Starr then provides sharp and succinct analysis of constitutional case law concerning a variety of issues, such as affirmative action, the rights of criminal defendants, the powers of the President, and federalism. The concluding chapter is devoted entirely to Bush v. Gore (2000). Much of Starr's analysis describes the cases and views of the justices in light of the two competing judicial philosophies adhered to the respective members of the court: textualism and common-law constitutionalism. As Starr notes, Justice Antonin Scalia has been a champion of textualism, an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation that requires a jurist to discern the meaning of the text, according to its structure, history, logic and original understanding. Textualism is often wrongly confused with "strict constructionism" or an attempt to discover what law was "intended" to mean in the minds of those who made the law, rather than the search for the meaning of the words actually adopted. This judicial philosophy stands in contrast to that of common-law constitutionalism, in which constitutional law is created through judicial decision-making by judges in individual cases, with the constitution's text and its original understanding holding a less prominent position. This judicial philosophy is all but synonymous with the "living Constitution" concept, which holds that our "understanding" of the Constitution's meaning "evolves" over time as our society continues to "evolve." The values that underlie Constitution are to be expounded by the judges based upon the ideals of the contemporary age. Starr spends a great deal of time in the First Amendment realm. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.) There is obviously much room to work with here, and Starr ably describes recent developments in the areas of free speech and religious establishment jurisprudence. One important development is the increasing role of "viewpoint neutrality" in the context of religious speech. This simply means that speech involving religious perspectives is to be treated on an equal footing with secular viewpoints.

A Must Read to Understand Our Supreme Court

I bought this book after seeing Starr on T.V. in a speach/question and answer forum about the book. In the forum, he spoke of how his editor kept sending the manuscript back to him insisting he remove the legal jargin that the general public would not understand. It was a success. As a non-student of law or courts, I got a huge education from this book. It was very readable and useful to understanding the Supreme Court and it's decisions for the last half of the century. He brings it all together showing how a series of decisions throughout the years led to the court taking the Bush Gore case and asserting itself as the most powerful branch of government as "first among equals."Note: this is not a history of Starr or his involvement in the Clinton years. But he does draw on his experience as a law clerk, soliciter general, and appelate court judge to show his personal insight into the court.I personally couldn't put it down until I was done reading it.

Written decidedly from the right but well worth the read

Kenneth Starr's "First Among Equals, the Supreme Court in American Life" offers a conservative view of the dynamic workings of the Supreme Court. Mr. Starr was a Supreme Court clerk of Chief Justice Warren Burger. He spends some time discussing different justices approach to interpreting the Constitution. He seems to favor the strict constructionist or textual approach followed by the likes of Justice Scalia. However he points out that other justices may take a historical view and follow the rule of stare decisis. He shows the least regard for the "living Constitution" approach.The Courts approach to some of the major cultural issues of the past fifty years are covered. First Amendment free speech issues from flag burning to campaign financing are covered. There are chapters on church and state issues, abortion, affirmative action and equal representation in the political process. His views are critical of the Warren Court's expansion of the protection of criminal defendants rights under the fourth and fifth amendments as well as the Warren court's tendency to usurp the legislative function. The final four chapters cover the courts roll in defining the relationship between the different divisions of our government. Here he covers issues of federalism and the relationship of the Court to Congress and to the executive branch. He devotes very little space to his own investigation of Bill Clinton but devotes most of the chapter on the relationship of the court to the executive branch to developing the proposition that the President must stand before the bar of justice just like anyone else. The final chapter is devoted to the issues (Constitutional or not) raised by the Bush vs. Gore controversy and is very enlightening.This book is written decidedly from the right but well worth the read.

First Amoung Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life

First Amoung Equals: The Supreme Court in American Life written by Kenneth W. Starr is a book that looks into the Rehnquist Court as he offers the reader an incisive and unpreedented view at paradoxes, power and the people who serve on the highest court in the land.When reading anything about the law, lawyers tend to loss readers because they are lawyers and can't speak in simpler terms and understandable English... they used too much lawyerese. This book was refeshing in that it is highly readable and understandable making for a enjoyable read. This book is divided into three parts and each part has chapters, all organized to get the reader up to speed. Starr begins this book with a thirty year evolutionary history of the Supreme Court with the Supreme Court then and now and then a chaapter on the Justices. We see that the Court decisions are fairly consistant... which I found to be surprising since the Warren Court and Burger Court were quite different in make-up.The Rehnquist Court is different still... all stemming from the human side of the court as it shaped our laws.Part two of the book looks at freedom of speach, the first amendment and politics, religion in the public square, parochial v. private schools, abortion, affirmaive action, gerrymandering, the exclusion of evidence from criminal trials, and Miranda. Granted there is a lot to cover here, but Starr makes the reading cogent and lucid so you can understand the complecxity and why things happen the way they do. Ever aware that his audience here are not lawyers, he gives us a compelling and supremely readable book.Part three is about the powers and structure of American Government. Here we find out about the statutory conversation between Court and Congress, the Rehnquist Court and the Federal Republic, Presidents: the Court and the Executive Branch and of course, Bush v. Gore. Here again, Starr makes this enjoyable to read as he explains in a very readable terms as he sheds light on one of the most frequently misunderstood legal pillar of American life... as the Supreme Court goes, so goes much of our nation's culture, society and politics.I found this book, first to be highly readable and understandable, next perseptive and brimming with insight. If you are looking for a book on recent history, (thirty years), about the Supreme Court this is your book.