Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series) 
asked by carrots on November 3, 2006 7:02 AM
Now in its 15th edition, Sullivan and Gunther's "Constitutional Law" is one of the leading casebooks on the subject.
This thorough treatment of constitutional law focuses on three core areas -- The Judicial Function in Constitutional Cases, The Structure of Government, and Individual Rights.
The new edition has been updated to include recent major Supreme Court decisions, as well as expanded materials on executive power, military tribunals and separation of powers in the war on terrorism.
Reviews
0%
0%
Kathleen M. Sullivan edited CONSTITUTIONAL LAW as a law school text. This book is indeed comprehensive, and Miss Sullivan presents both older cases to give readers a background of more recent cases. This book gives readers considerable legal thinking.
Miss Sullivan gives the reader both comprehensive presentations of the cases plus a historical background of the thinking that the "Founding Fathers" used in writing and defending the United States Constitution. Such background is useful to historians, legal scholars, and practising attornies. This material is detailed but important for those who want more than a superficial understanding of the Constitution.
Two cases that are cited in this book that impressed this reviewer were GITLOW VS NEW YORK (1925) and THE WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION VS BARNETTE (1943). While these cases are mentioned in other legal texts, the other texts do not give the verbatum opinions of the justices. For example, Miss Sullivan cites Justice Sandford's opinion in the cased titled GITLAW VS NEW YORK which is important. One must note that Justice Sandford's acknowlegement that the first paragraph of the Fourteenth Amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states is crucial in understanding why unconsitutional state laws can be successfully challenged. Readers should read this opinion to have insight into "The Incorporation Doctrine." She also cites Justice Jackson's majority opinion in the case titled THE WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION VS BARNETTE which was rendered in 1943, in the middle of World War II. This opinion is an articulate expression about compelling those who dissent to agree with established opinion. Some folks are shocked when jurists rule against school authorities who attempt to compel students to say the Pledge to the Flag. They would be less surprised if they read this opinion. One should note that Miss Sullivan gives a good historical background to these cases.
Miss Sullivan's CONSTITUTIONAL LAW should be compared to John E. Nowak's and Ronald D.Rotunda's book also titled CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Both texts are comprehensive and helpful to those who are interested in Constitutional Law. Another useful text is Terry Eastland's book titled FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE SUPREME COURT. For those who may find Miss Sullivan's book "too big," Eastland's book is easier to read.
Some reviewers critisized Miss Sullivan for "leftest bias" (whatever this phrase means). This may be true, but this reviewer did not detect such bias. If there is such bias, comparisons with other law texts will help those interested in making such comparisons.
While Miss Sullivan's CONSTITUTIONAL LAW is not "perfect," this text is comprehensive and useful. Kathleen Sullivan and John Gunther did a credible job in giving the interested student a thorough examination of Constitutional Law which many have argued has taken a beating recently.
Miss Sullivan gives the reader both comprehensive presentations of the cases plus a historical background of the thinking that the "Founding Fathers" used in writing and defending the United States Constitution. Such background is useful to historians, legal scholars, and practising attornies. This material is detailed but important for those who want more than a superficial understanding of the Constitution.
Two cases that are cited in this book that impressed this reviewer were GITLOW VS NEW YORK (1925) and THE WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION VS BARNETTE (1943). While these cases are mentioned in other legal texts, the other texts do not give the verbatum opinions of the justices. For example, Miss Sullivan cites Justice Sandford's opinion in the cased titled GITLAW VS NEW YORK which is important. One must note that Justice Sandford's acknowlegement that the first paragraph of the Fourteenth Amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states is crucial in understanding why unconsitutional state laws can be successfully challenged. Readers should read this opinion to have insight into "The Incorporation Doctrine." She also cites Justice Jackson's majority opinion in the case titled THE WEST VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION VS BARNETTE which was rendered in 1943, in the middle of World War II. This opinion is an articulate expression about compelling those who dissent to agree with established opinion. Some folks are shocked when jurists rule against school authorities who attempt to compel students to say the Pledge to the Flag. They would be less surprised if they read this opinion. One should note that Miss Sullivan gives a good historical background to these cases.
Miss Sullivan's CONSTITUTIONAL LAW should be compared to John E. Nowak's and Ronald D.Rotunda's book also titled CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Both texts are comprehensive and helpful to those who are interested in Constitutional Law. Another useful text is Terry Eastland's book titled FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE SUPREME COURT. For those who may find Miss Sullivan's book "too big," Eastland's book is easier to read.
Some reviewers critisized Miss Sullivan for "leftest bias" (whatever this phrase means). This may be true, but this reviewer did not detect such bias. If there is such bias, comparisons with other law texts will help those interested in making such comparisons.
While Miss Sullivan's CONSTITUTIONAL LAW is not "perfect," this text is comprehensive and useful. Kathleen Sullivan and John Gunther did a credible job in giving the interested student a thorough examination of Constitutional Law which many have argued has taken a beating recently.
reviewed by rafit on November 7, 2006 6:07 PM
0%
0%
This massive back-breaker of a casebook is seriously in need of major editing. The cases were frequently repetitive and exhaustive about minute details. The editor would make a point, the following case would repeat it twice, and then the editor would again repeat it following the case.
Another thing that made the book so unpleasant to read was its open-ended, inquisitive writing style. Sometimes the notes following a case would be nothing but paragraphs of questions. So what is the significance of the case? So what does it all mean? Would it have mattered if fact X was fact Y instead? Questions to make you think are great, but they also slow your reading down. Yes, the material is interesting, but I don't have time to rub my chin and ponder the ins, outs, what-ifs, and maybes of every case, especially when I have 50 more pages of the same due that night.
If you have a sharp Con Law professor who assigns very specific parts of the book and is able to cut through all the repetition, then the book would likely be a strong supplement to your classroom experience. Unfortunately, my professor was HORRIBLE, and lazily assigned huge reams of reading, with almost no follow-up discussion.
Another thing that made the book so unpleasant to read was its open-ended, inquisitive writing style. Sometimes the notes following a case would be nothing but paragraphs of questions. So what is the significance of the case? So what does it all mean? Would it have mattered if fact X was fact Y instead? Questions to make you think are great, but they also slow your reading down. Yes, the material is interesting, but I don't have time to rub my chin and ponder the ins, outs, what-ifs, and maybes of every case, especially when I have 50 more pages of the same due that night.
If you have a sharp Con Law professor who assigns very specific parts of the book and is able to cut through all the repetition, then the book would likely be a strong supplement to your classroom experience. Unfortunately, my professor was HORRIBLE, and lazily assigned huge reams of reading, with almost no follow-up discussion.
reviewed by mattisboss on November 12, 2006 5:05 AM
0%
0%
The whole point of buying casebooks like this is to have handy a collection of the most pertinent points of relevant cases presented in an effective manner that makes sense. That said, Sullivan (who FAILED the CA bar exam) does a horrible job editing, and fails to make a decent casebook.
Many of the cases in this book are either significantly under-edited, leaving you to wallow through the entirety of all or almost all of the opinions, with no focus whatsoever.
The rest are merely noted in brief paragraphs, oversimplified and summarized beyond recognition, glossing over major Constitutional turning points (especially so in the sections on the incorporation doctrine and reproductive rights). Sullivan especially oversummarizes and oversimplifies Rehnquist and Scalia's opinions in an unhelpful manner (displaying her extreme left-leaning).
The most telling sign of the poor editing is the very size of the text. It is massive. It is no surprise that inside Sullivan utterly fails to make her points succinctly or directly.
Chances are, if you are reading this, you HAVE to buy this book for a class. Woe be to you. Settle for a cheaper, used, old edition of this texgt, and go buy yourself a decent outline.
Many of the cases in this book are either significantly under-edited, leaving you to wallow through the entirety of all or almost all of the opinions, with no focus whatsoever.
The rest are merely noted in brief paragraphs, oversimplified and summarized beyond recognition, glossing over major Constitutional turning points (especially so in the sections on the incorporation doctrine and reproductive rights). Sullivan especially oversummarizes and oversimplifies Rehnquist and Scalia's opinions in an unhelpful manner (displaying her extreme left-leaning).
The most telling sign of the poor editing is the very size of the text. It is massive. It is no surprise that inside Sullivan utterly fails to make her points succinctly or directly.
Chances are, if you are reading this, you HAVE to buy this book for a class. Woe be to you. Settle for a cheaper, used, old edition of this texgt, and go buy yourself a decent outline.
reviewed by runaway on November 22, 2006 6:40 AM
0%
0%
More importantly, why am I writing this? If you're considering this book, you'd better be in law school. In that case, you're probably obligated to buy this book for your Con Law class, which begs the question in the title of this review. You're buying it anyway! Stop wasting time on the internet and get back to work (oh, the irony).
If you're not in law school and still thinking of buying this, spend your money on therapy instead. At this point in your life, you need it much more than a casebook on Con Law.
If you're not in law school and still thinking of buying this, spend your money on therapy instead. At this point in your life, you need it much more than a casebook on Con Law.
reviewed by maxmill on November 24, 2006 6:19 PM
0%
0%
Say that you did not flunk the 2005 California bar exam.
How could a middle-aged feminist lawyer who is a former professor at Harvard Law School and Dean of the Stanford Law School flunk the bar exam? Is the exam unconstitutional? Does the exam discriminate against women? Are you entitled to a law license under the 9th Amendment? Inquiring minds want to know.
Explain why you are qualified to edit a casebook, but you are not qualified (for the time being) to practice law in California. Of course, you did not write the opinions in this casebook. However, you did select the cases, edit them, and write the notes and questions about them.
Like a pack of cigarettes, this book should bear a warning on the cover: "The author flunked the bar exam after she edited this casebook"
How could a middle-aged feminist lawyer who is a former professor at Harvard Law School and Dean of the Stanford Law School flunk the bar exam? Is the exam unconstitutional? Does the exam discriminate against women? Are you entitled to a law license under the 9th Amendment? Inquiring minds want to know.
Explain why you are qualified to edit a casebook, but you are not qualified (for the time being) to practice law in California. Of course, you did not write the opinions in this casebook. However, you did select the cases, edit them, and write the notes and questions about them.
Like a pack of cigarettes, this book should bear a warning on the cover: "The author flunked the bar exam after she edited this casebook"
reviewed by scanner on November 26, 2006 4:49 PM