| The book that is the subject of this review is | | | | secession at various points in time, Lincoln |
| The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution, | | | | eventually stated that secession was an |
| by Kevin Gutzman and published this year in 2007. | | | | impossibility and the Civil War was fought to |
| As with all of the books in the "Politically Incorrect | | | | prevent the southern states from dissolving the |
| Guide to.." series, the subject matter is the | | | | Union. |
| lesser-known side of a popular topic: in this case, | | | | The book moves through historical decisions one |
| the United States Constitution. Gutzman provides | | | | after another, hitting on the irrationality and |
| an historical and topical examination of the original | | | | vagueness of the antitrust laws, the Court's battle |
| intent of the Constitution and how the views of | | | | against Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal legislation |
| the founders have been distorted over time by | | | | and FDR's decision to replace the judges with his |
| the three branches of government. However, the | | | | own partisan appointees who would follow his |
| judicial branch is clearly held most responsible for | | | | policies. It is in the discussions of religion's role in |
| the changes, additions, and convolutions to | | | | the government that is the most interesting, |
| constitutional law. | | | | however. |
| In fact, if any book suffers from the lack of a | | | | Originally, the Constitution was intended to |
| subtitle, this is it. A few come to mind off-hand as | | | | prevent the federal government from |
| potential nominees, such as "How the Supreme | | | | institutionalizing a state religion for the entire Union. |
| Court Ruined Everything," or "The Founders' | | | | State religions, however, could have their own |
| Losing Battle with the Judgeocracy." After reading | | | | religion, and often did. It was not until the |
| the book, it is clear that the decisions rendered by | | | | twentieth century that Justice Black put up the |
| the Supreme Court over time have eroded the | | | | wall of "separation between church and state," |
| states' rights that Jefferson held so dear and | | | | and denied state or local government's the right |
| accomplished the consolidation of power in the | | | | to deal with religion as they wished. This took the |
| hands of the federal government. | | | | power of deciding on the role of religion in a |
| Of course, Gutzman is not positing a vast | | | | community out of the community itself and |
| conspiracy of any sort that designed to take | | | | installed it firmly with the Supreme Court. The |
| away the liberty of state and local governments | | | | First Amendment, originally intended to limit the |
| to decide their own social laws on contracts and | | | | power of the federal government, was extended |
| place this power in the hands of the national | | | | to state and local governments, as well, reversing |
| government. The court, though, from its inception | | | | the intent of the Founders. Gutzman remarks that |
| realized that it was designed to be the least | | | | Christianity was the main target of the Court's |
| powerful branch of the government and various | | | | decisions, stating that "any religion is okay, so long |
| chief justices decided to alter that power balance | | | | as it is not Christianity." |
| as much as possible. | | | | As well as the victory against religion, the |
| After some preliminary battles between the | | | | Supreme Court also took on issues of morality, |
| Court and the original intent of the Constitution, | | | | criminal law, and discrimination, as well as the |
| Gutzman sees the "imperial judiciary" beginning in | | | | ever-popular-to-discuss Roe v. Wade abortion |
| earnest with the fourth Chief Justice, John | | | | decision. The decisions rendered by the court |
| Marshall. Gutzman states that Marshall's chief | | | | served to further transfer the rights of states to |
| legacy was the writing of "the defeated Federalist | | | | govern as they will and place it in the hands of |
| Party's constitutional views into American | | | | the federal government or the Supreme Court |
| constitutional law." Despite the fact that the | | | | itself. Gutzman sees these decisions as a |
| people of the United States at the time voted | | | | complete inversion of the original intent of the |
| into office politicians who advocated states' rights | | | | Founding Fathers and the Constitution itself: "The |
| and limited power of the federal government, | | | | Court has overturned the right of the people of |
| Marshall was the main advocate of using the | | | | the states to govern themselves, overturned the |
| Court to strengthen the central government and | | | | Tenth Amendment, and thus overturned the |
| apply the same laws throughout the Union, even | | | | Constitution -- and called it the "rule of law." In |
| overriding state laws. | | | | fact, this may be Gutzman's main argument and |
| Marshall's position was at odds with the beliefs of | | | | an adequate summary of the entire work |
| Thomas Jefferson, who saw the growing power | | | | (although too long to be a subtitle). |
| of the Supreme Court as a threat to the | | | | The book hits on another of additional topics, as |
| constitution. Jefferson believed that laws were the | | | | well, including the teaching of constitutional law in |
| social agreements that people agreed to be | | | | school, which examines various cases but does |
| governed by and judges were to apply the | | | | not discuss the original intent of the writers of the |
| meaning of these agreements as clearly as | | | | laws the Supreme Court has decided upon. This |
| possible. In contrast, Marshall and various other | | | | leaves law students with a firm understanding of |
| judges believed in a "natural law" underlying all laws | | | | the decisions rendered upon various laws and their |
| and that the role of a judge was to examine laws | | | | applications over time, but no idea if these |
| in relation to these universal statutes. This, of | | | | applications were intended for the subject laws in |
| course, replaced the role of the people in deciding | | | | the first place. Thus, one mistake is piled on top |
| their laws with an aristocratic Philosopher Counsel | | | | of another, until the original mistake is buried |
| that would determine the rules that all people | | | | under years of precedent. |
| should live by. | | | | Gutzman's work is an interesting and useful guide |
| Most of the book focuses on various Supreme | | | | to the US Constitution, its original intent, history |
| Court decisions on a range of social issues that | | | | and its application (and perversion) over time. |
| were being debated at the time. From Lincoln's | | | | While the book could easily be quite a bit longer |
| suspension of habeus corpus to slavery and the | | | | and the issues discussed in more detail, it is quite |
| original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment, to | | | | ideal as an introduction to the history of arguably |
| the flip-flopping done on the issue of segregation, | | | | the most important document to the history of |
| Gutzman illustrates that the Court has rarely | | | | the United States and possibly the best |
| acted in the interest of the people or the states, | | | | agreement ever made between a government |
| and instead consolidated power with the federal | | | | and its people. |
| government. Although some states threatened | | | | |