Rating: 
Summary: This excellent book helps Americans understand the Court
Review: I am not a U.S. Supreme Court enthusiast, but in light of the Courts activity in the 2000 presidential election case (George W. Bush vs. Al Gore), I searched out books on the U.S. Supreme Court and found "May It Please the Court" to be a fascinating read. It sheds light on the ebb and flow of the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings and reasonings over the past 30 years. Recently millions of Americans were privileged to hear live the two presidential election cases that the U.S. Supreme Court took and vicariously we all had a "fascinating you-are-there experience." In "May It Please the Court" editors Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton spent scores of hours at the National Archives in Washington retrieving and editing twenty-three cases and once again give average Americans the opportunity to experience, in proxy, each court case. In 1955 the U.S. Supreme Court began tape recording all cases from which twenty-three ground-breaking cases were selected by Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton. These are segmented into five sections: "Secure the Blessings of Liberty," "Congress Shall Make No Law," "In All Criminal Prosecutions," The Equal Protection of the Law" and "A Right of Personal Privacy." Each section has an informative foreword by the Editors. Skilled advocates on both sides, as in the two presidential election cases, argue each landmark case forcefully, and most often, as in the recent presidential election cases, the Court's opinions have sparked controversy. Our Constitution invested great powers in government officials and these powers are only kept in check by the Bill of Rights. And these Rights only have meaning if government officials can be forced to obey them. Only the courts have the ultimate power of enforcement and thus the Supreme Court of the United States of America has the ultimate power. This excellent book helps all Americans to understand how this Court balances the legitimate powers of government officials and the rights of the people. Highly Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: This excellent book helps Americans understand the Court
Review: I am not a U.S. Supreme Court enthusiast, but in light of the Courts activity in the 2000 presidential election case (George W. Bush vs. Al Gore), I searched out books on the U.S. Supreme Court and found "May It Please the Court" to be a fascinating read. It sheds light on the ebb and flow of the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings and reasonings over the past 30 years. Recently millions of Americans were privileged to hear live the two presidential election cases that the U.S. Supreme Court took and vicariously we all had a "fascinating you-are-there experience." In "May It Please the Court" editors Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton spent scores of hours at the National Archives in Washington retrieving and editing twenty-three cases and once again give average Americans the opportunity to experience, in proxy, each court case. In 1955 the U.S. Supreme Court began tape recording all cases from which twenty-three ground-breaking cases were selected by Peter Irons and Stephanie Guitton. These are segmented into five sections: "Secure the Blessings of Liberty," "Congress Shall Make No Law," "In All Criminal Prosecutions," The Equal Protection of the Law" and "A Right of Personal Privacy." Each section has an informative foreword by the Editors. Skilled advocates on both sides, as in the two presidential election cases, argue each landmark case forcefully, and most often, as in the recent presidential election cases, the Court's opinions have sparked controversy. Our Constitution invested great powers in government officials and these powers are only kept in check by the Bill of Rights. And these Rights only have meaning if government officials can be forced to obey them. Only the courts have the ultimate power of enforcement and thus the Supreme Court of the United States of America has the ultimate power. This excellent book helps all Americans to understand how this Court balances the legitimate powers of government officials and the rights of the people. Highly Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Must Have for ALL Law Students!!
Review: I bought this book because it sounded interesting, and because I hoped that itwould help me remember the cases that I needed to for class. I am a law student. The cases covered in this book are: Baker v Carr, US v Nixon, Deshaney v Winnebago County, Abington School District v Schempp, Edwards v Aguillard, Wisconsin v Yoder, Cox v Louisiana, Tinker v Des Moines, Communist Party v Subversive Activities Control Board, Texas v Johnson, New York Times v United States, Gideon v Wainwright, Terry v Ohio, Miranda v Arizona, Gregg v Georgia, Cooper v Aaron, Heart of Atlanta Motel v US, Loving v Virginia, Palmer v Thompson, Regents v Bakke, San Antonio v Rodriguez, Roe v Wade, and Bowers v Hardwick. These are all super important cases which are studied in multiple classes. It helps to hear the oral argument to understand the issue and what is at stake in these decisions better. If you are a law student and would like to be able to listen to the cases, understand them and therefore remember them better, this series is the way to go. I highly recommend purchasing this book.
Rating:
Summary: One word: Wow!
Review: I truly admire Peter Irons, the primary editor of this work. Anybody who brazenly stands up against a government agency in order to publish material in the public record (these Supreme Court recordings and transcripts were not supposed to be reproduced) is OK by me. And what a collection this is! Even people without any interest or education in law or politics will recognize some of these -- and those who are law junkies will love them all. I do not necessarily agree with others that Irons chose cases based on his "liberal" leanings; the cases we see and hear are among the very most important in the ongoing struggle to define "what the law means" (the phrase Chief Justice John Marshall used in Marbury v Madison). Even if one disagrees with the outcome of particular cases, it's important and educational to *hear* just how the argumetns for both sides were presented. This eliminates much of the mystery behind how the court operates, and that is certainly a good thing. I just love the book and recordings, and have read & listened to them over and over. I give my highest recommendation for this work, and even moreso for students and families interested in our system of criminal and civil justice.
Rating:
Summary: One word: Wow!
Review: I truly admire Peter Irons, the primary editor of this work. Anybody who brazenly stands up against a government agency in order to publish material in the public record (these Supreme Court recordings and transcripts were not supposed to be reproduced) is OK by me. And what a collection this is! Even people without any interest or education in law or politics will recognize some of these -- and those who are law junkies will love them all. I do not necessarily agree with others that Irons chose cases based on his "liberal" leanings; the cases we see and hear are among the very most important in the ongoing struggle to define "what the law means" (the phrase Chief Justice John Marshall used in Marbury v Madison). Even if one disagrees with the outcome of particular cases, it's important and educational to *hear* just how the argumetns for both sides were presented. This eliminates much of the mystery behind how the court operates, and that is certainly a good thing. I just love the book and recordings, and have read & listened to them over and over. I give my highest recommendation for this work, and even moreso for students and families interested in our system of criminal and civil justice.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding! (Again)
Review: Peter Irons has consistently written books that describe with amazing clarity and insight the inner workings of the American judicial system. "May It Please the Court" is brilliant in large part because of a very simple, straight forward idea: ensure publicity for Supreme Court hearings that should have been quite public from the outset. Those who accuse Irons of partisanship have missed the mark: it is the contents of the very Supreme Court hearings he describes which provoke thought and evoke political response - not Irons' commentary. I look forward to the next work by Peter Irons, and can only hope he sees fit to comment on the Supreme Court's various controversial rulings since the turn of the century. His thoughtful consideration would be helpful to lawyers and non-lawyers alike.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding! (Again)
Review: Peter Irons has consistently written books that describe with amazing clarity and insight the inner workings of the American judicial system. "May It Please the Court" is brilliant in large part because of a very simple, straight forward idea: ensure publicity for Supreme Court hearings that should have been quite public from the outset. Those who accuse Irons of partisanship have missed the mark: it is the contents of the very Supreme Court hearings he describes which provoke thought and evoke political response - not Irons' commentary. I look forward to the next work by Peter Irons, and can only hope he sees fit to comment on the Supreme Court's various controversial rulings since the turn of the century. His thoughtful consideration would be helpful to lawyers and non-lawyers alike.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding! (Again)
Review: Peter Irons has consistently written books that describe with amazing clarity and insight the inner workings of the American judicial system. "May It Please the Court" is brilliant in large part because of a very simple, straight forward idea: ensure publicity for Supreme Court hearings that should have been quite public from the outset. Those who accuse Irons of partisanship have missed the mark: it is the contents of the very Supreme Court hearings he describes which provoke thought and evoke political response - not Irons' commentary. I look forward to the next work by Peter Irons, and can only hope he sees fit to comment on the Supreme Court's various controversial rulings since the turn of the century. His thoughtful consideration would be helpful to lawyers and non-lawyers alike.
Rating:
Summary: Good information
Review: The book and the tapes are great if you're into following case arguments, etc. Lawyers and anyone interested in law or negotiation will find a valuable tool in this material. By the way, if you're having this shipped outside the U.S., you may want to buy the book-only version instead, as many countries tax audiotapes heavily, even if they do not tax books. Furthermore, when they apply the tax, they usually apply it to the value of the entire order (ie all books in the order + s & h), so if you do decide to get the tapes, it's a good idea to have this shipped in a separate order.
Rating: 
Summary: A facinating look at the Court
Review: The book contains edited and slightly commented oral arguments for a number of cases brought before the Supreme Court of the United States since Earl Warren ordered that oral arguments be recorded. Few know that it is possible to attend oral arguments at the court (highly recommended if you ever visit Washington D.C.), and even fewer know the recordings exist. This is a set of six tapes with edited and commented (by Peter Irons) cases, together with a book which transcribes the tapes and includes highlights of the opinions in the case. There is also a brief introduction to the Court in the first tape. The cases touch on a number of issues, ranging from the highly controversial (Roe v. Wade and abortion rights, Edwards v. Aguillard and teaching of creationism in school, Johnson v. Texas and flag burning) to issues which perhaps aren't so controversial anymore (such as the 'one person, one vote' rule). They are, nonetheless, very interesting to listen to. I have very few regrets about the book, but they should perhaps be mentioned. First, there is no doubt that there is a somewhat liberal slant to the presentation and comments by Peter Irons in the tapes; I don't find it too problematical since they tend to agree with my own feelings on the subject, but others may find it annoying. Second, I cannot but be somewhat disappointed that these are ->edited<- and not the full arguments. I realize one hour or more per case may be prohibitive and it is perhaps better to have more cases and edited highlights of the arguments, but I would have loved to have access to the full argument nonetheless. At least in some cases, the impression given is certainly not that of the whole argument (in Edwards v. Aguillard, one gets the feeling that the attorney for Aguillard did pretty well, but one need only read Stephen J. Gould's account of the arguments to know that Justice Scalia trounced him and it was only through the intervention of the amicus curiae brief by the Nobel Laureates that the eventual decision was reached). And thirdly, it is very disappointing that the companion book has only highlights of the opinions in the case. The full opinion (together with full dissents and concurrences) would have been a very welcome addition to the set. Despite these problems (which are the reason I give it a 4 star rating rather than a 5; I wish we had a 4.5 rating), this is a highly recommended set. This is a great and facinating look at the Court and at oral arguments therein, and it is highly recommended. Even if you are only interested in three or four of the cases or issues, you will find it a very worthwhile investment.
| 
