The Most Powerful Court in the World by Stuart Banner: More than US legal analysis, it's an excellent history
Author
:
Stuart Banner
ISBN-13
:
9780197780350
Publisher
:
OUP USA
Guideline Price
:
£30.99
While the title of this book indicates a
legal
history of the
United States
supreme court
, the book is far more than a jurisprudential analysis of the highest court in the United States.
Banner, a law professor at the University of California, sets out to avoid the traditional legal history of the court and instead writes a trilateral history, a consideration of the court's decisions, the lives of its justices and an analysis of the relevant contemporaneous political and societal influences.
Banner argues that it is not possible to consider the court in isolation and during periods of its history, the court was the driving force which directed the course of the United States.
An example of this impactful influence can be seen in the 1803 decision of Marbury v Madison which has become legendary in the canon of constitutional jurisprudence in which the court recognised the judiciary's power of judicial review.
READ MORE
Dred Scott
Banner notes that the decision of Chief Justice Roger Taney in Dred Scott v Sandford (1857) is often cited as one of the most shameful opinions in the history of the court.
In Dred Scott, the court ruled that people of African descent, whether enslaved or free, were not and could never be citizens of the United States and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court. Dred Scott would go on to play a significant role in hastening the onset of the American Civil War in 1861.
During the Chief Justiceship of Earl Warren (1953-1969), the court ushered in the most liberal period of its history. During this period, the court determined seminal cases such as Brown v Board of Education (1954) which banned the segregation of public schools, Miranda v Arizona (1966) which ruled that the police must warn a person of their constitutional rights, before conducting an interrogation and New York Times Co. v Sullivan
(1964) which ruled the freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment to the constitution limited the ability of public officials to sue for defamation.
The author notes that the US supreme court is not apolitical. The court is exposed to politics in a number of different ways, including through the appointment of its justices.
When a vacancy arises, the president nominates a candidate for appointment and the Senate confirms their appointment. Traditionally, Republican presidents have appointed conservative justices while Democratic presidents have appointed more liberally minded members of the bench.
Roe v Wade
Arguably the most controversial decision of the court in the past century concerned abortion rights. In Roe v Wade (1973) the court found that the US constitution protected the right to have an abortion before the point of foetal viability.
Given the polarisation of views on social issues, there was an immediate call for the overturn of Roe. The US constitution, similar to other modern constitutions, can evolve over time and the court can revisit its earlier decisions if the make-up of its bench shifts and social norms evolve.
Following a number of Republican appointed justices, the court now leans towards a conservative interpretation of the constitution. In 2022, the court was prepared to reconsider Roe in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization.
In Dobbs, the court ruled that the constitution does not confer a right to abortion, thereby overruling the controversial decision in Roe. The decision in Dodds has caused a legal and social cataclysm in the United States.
Arguably the most controversial decision of the court in the past century concerned abortion rights. Photograph: Getty Images
Several States moved quickly to ban abortion, and the Roe/ Dodds line of case law is likely to reverberate in the United States for many years to come.
The author brings the history of the court up to the present and considers a number of appeals to the court, brought by President Donald Trump, on various issues including the 2020 United States presidential election. Banner notes that Trump has a very poor success rate before the court.
While this is certainly an enlightening history of the court, there are aspects of the court's history which are considered in a summary manner only. For example, the book concentrates on the liberal period of the Warren Court but pays little attention to the Watergate scandal and its political and legal fallout.
That said, Banner, has authored an excellent, comprehensive and engaging one-volume history of, as the title enunciates, possibly the most powerful court in the world.
Dr James Meighan is a practising lawyer and holds a PhD in constitutional history from the University of Limerick.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
Co-founder of Gareth Sheridan's US business involved in 2019 Moldova airline controversy
Gareth Sheridan 's partner in his publicly-quoted US business Nutriband was involved in a major controversy in 2019 over the privatisation of Air Moldova and possible links to Russian oligarchs. When Mr Sheridan (35) announced his intention earlier this week to put his name forward for election as president, he was replaced as Nutriband's chief executive by the company's chairman and co-founder, Serguei Melnik (49), a lawyer from Moldova resident in the United States. Mr Melnik was a 25 per cent shareholder in a Romanian company called Civil Aviation Group that took over Air Moldova in 2018 when it was privatised. A year later the Moldovan national anti-corruption centre announced it had seized assets of both the airline and the Romanian company as part of an investigation into money laundering. READ MORE The seizure was connected to 'large-scale money laundering at the privatisation of Air Moldova', the agency said at the time. 'We are talking about a series of fictitious transactions that led to the privatisation of the airline,' it said. [ Who is presidential hopeful Gareth Sheridan? Opens in new window ] The chairman of an ad-hoc parliamentary committee in Moldova, Igor Munteanu, said part of the payment for the airline was transacted in cash and that money due to be paid to creditors had not been paid. There is no suggestion Mr Sheridan was involved in any way in the Air Moldova deal. In 2021 an Air Moldova Airbus A319 aircraft was prevented from leaving Dublin Airport after a successful application for its seizure was made in the High Court. The High Court ruled in favour of a Romanian aircraft leasing firm that had been the beneficiary of a €4.2 million arbitration award to it against Air Moldova. The court was told Moldova's criminal assets recovery agency had seized Air Moldova assets in 2019 as part of an investigation into alleged criminal activity, including money laundering. In the wake of the privatisation of the Moldovan airline there were media reports that Russian oligarchs associated with the ownership of the airport in the Moldovan capital, Chisinau, might be linked to the purchase. News reports highlighted the fact that a business associate of Mr Melnik's, Vitalie Botgros, had formerly worked for a Russian conglomerate, Transmasholding, which had links to the Moldovan airport. Mr Botgros, also a lawyer from Moldova, is currently the largest shareholder in Nutriband, owning 39 per cent of its shares as against Mr Sheridan's 17.6 per cent. He worked for the now sanctioned Transmashholding between 2005 and 2006 and was chairman of Nutriband between 2016 and 2020. Mr Sheridan, an entrepreneur from Dublin, is to hold a press conference in Dublin on Thursday morning to answer questions about his bid for the presidency. He has been contacted for comment as has Mr Melnik. A spokesman for Mr Sheridan had not provided comment at the time of going to print. Efforts to contact Mr Melnik were unsuccessful ahead of publication.
Irish Times
a day ago
- Irish Times
National guard deployed on streets of Washington after Trump takes control of city's police
The Washington , DC national guard began deploying on the city's streets overnight, a day after Donald Trump ordered their arrival and took control of the city's police force, calling Washington a 'lawless' city, despite official crime statistics saying otherwise. Defence officials said a small number of the roughly 800 national guard members planned for the mission had been mobilised, with more expected to arrive in the coming days. About 850 officers and agents took part in a 'massive law enforcement surge' across Washington on Monday night and made nearly two dozen arrests, the White House has said. The violent crime rate in the city is at a 30-year low. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday: 'As part of the president's massive law enforcement surge, last night approximately 850 officers and agents were surged across the city. They made a total of 23 arrests, including multiple other contacts.' READ MORE The arrests consisted of homicide, firearms offences, possession with intent to distribute narcotics, fare evasion, lewd acts and stalking, Leavitt added. 'A total of six illegal handguns were seized off of District of Columbia's streets as part of last night's effort.' [ Trump sends troops into Washington DC: distraction tactic or part of wider policy? Opens in new window ] Leavitt added: 'This is only the beginning. Over the course of the next month, the Trump administration will relentlessly pursue and arrest every violent criminal in the district who breaks the law, undermines public safety and endangers law-abiding Americans.' Earlier, Muriel Bowser, the mayor of Washington, DC, said she expected members of the national guard to be deployed on federal property in the US capital, including parks, monuments, federal buildings. Leavitt also told reporters that homeless people have the option be taken to a homeless shelter and offered addiction and/or mental health services. 'If they refuse, they will be susceptible to fines or to jail time. These are pre-existing laws that are already on the books. They have not been enforced,' she said. US president Donald Trump announces that he is assuming control of Washington's Metropolitan Police Department and deploying the national guard in the city at the White House on Monday. Photograph: Doug Mills/The New York Times Trump's intervention has been widely condemned as an authoritarian power grab that undermines the autonomy of Washington's DC local government and seeks to distract attention from political problems such as the Jeffrey Epstein files. Bowser had earlier pledged to work 'side by side' with the federal government as national guard troops arrived at their headquarters in Washington. Speaking after a meeting with the attorney general, Pam Bondi, at the justice department, Bowser told reporters: 'I won't go into the details of our operational plan at this point but you will see the Metropolitan police department (MPD) working side by side with our federal partners in order to enforce the effort that we need around the city.' Bowser has cultivated a delicate working relationship with Trump since his return to power in January, avoiding direct confrontations when possible. On Tuesday, she struck a conciliatory note and said she would try to make the most of the extra resources to fight crime. 'What I'm focused on is the federal surge and how to make the most of the additional officer support that we have,' she said. 'We have the best in the business at MPD and chief Pamela Smith to lead that effort and to make sure that the men and women who are coming from federal law enforcement are being well used and that, if there is national guard here, that they're being well used and all in an effort to drive down crime. 'So, how we got here or what we think about the circumstances right now, we have more police and we want to make sure we're using them.' However, other Democratic mayors across the US have adopted a different tone, warning Trump against expanding his law-and-order power grab in other big cities. [ Trump has long bedazzled his life – now he's refashioning the Oval and our democracy Opens in new window ] Trump told reporters on Monday: 'We have other cities also that are bad,' citing the Democratic strongholds of Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. 'And then, of course, you have Baltimore and Oakland. You don't even mention them any more, they're so far gone.' Stephen Miller, an influential White House deputy chief of staff, stepped up the rhetoric on Tuesday, tweeting without evidence: 'Crime stats in big blue cities are fake. The real rates of crime, chaos & dysfunction are orders of magnitude higher. Everyone who lives in these areas knows this. They program their entire lives around it. Democrats are trying to unravel civilization. Pres Trump will save it.' Crime stats in big blue cities are fake. The real rates of crime, chaos & dysfunction are orders of magnitude higher. Everyone who lives in these areas knows this. They program their entire lives around it. Democrats are trying to unravel civilization. Pres Trump will save it. — Stephen Miller (@StephenM) All five cities named by Trump are run by black mayors. Most were outspoken in denouncing the president's move. Brandon Johnson, Chicago's mayor, said in a statement: 'Sending in the national guard would only serve to destabilise our city and undermine our public safety efforts.' Brandon Scott, the mayor of Baltimore, said: 'When it comes to public safety in Baltimore, he should turn off the rightwing propaganda and look at the facts. Baltimore is the safest it's been in over 50 years.' Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, where troops were sent earlier this month in a crackdown on protests, posted: 'Another experiment by the administration, another power grab from local government. This is performative. This is a stunt. It always has been and always will be.' Trump took command of the Washington, DC police department and deployed the national guard under laws and constitutional powers that give the federal government more sway over the capital than other cities. But Democrats raised concerns that Washington could be a blueprint for similar strong-arm tactics elsewhere. Christina Henderson, a Washington, DC council member, told CNN on Tuesday: 'I was listening to the president's press conference yesterday, and I think it should be concerning to all Americans that he talked about other cities. 'The District of Columbia, for decades, without statehood, has always been used as a Petri dish, where Congress or the federal government is trying out ideas here. So, I would hope that folks don't lose sight of what's happening in the district. And even if they don't live here, they fight hard with us.' California's governor, Gavin Newsom, warned that Trump 'will gaslight his way into militarising any city he wants in United States'. JB Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, said the president 'has absolutely no right and no legal ability to send troops into the city of Chicago, and so I reject that notion'. He added: 'You've seen that he doesn't follow the law. I have talked about the fact that the Nazis in Germany in the 30s tore down a constitutional republic in just 53 days. It does not take much, frankly, and we have a president who seems hell-bent on doing just that.' – Guardian
Irish Times
2 days ago
- Irish Times
The Most Powerful Court in the World by Stuart Banner: More than US legal analysis, it's an excellent history
The Most Powerful Court in the World - A History of the Supreme Court of the United States Author : Stuart Banner ISBN-13 : 9780197780350 Publisher : OUP USA Guideline Price : £30.99 While the title of this book indicates a legal history of the United States supreme court , the book is far more than a jurisprudential analysis of the highest court in the United States. Banner, a law professor at the University of California, sets out to avoid the traditional legal history of the court and instead writes a trilateral history, a consideration of the court's decisions, the lives of its justices and an analysis of the relevant contemporaneous political and societal influences. Banner argues that it is not possible to consider the court in isolation and during periods of its history, the court was the driving force which directed the course of the United States. An example of this impactful influence can be seen in the 1803 decision of Marbury v Madison which has become legendary in the canon of constitutional jurisprudence in which the court recognised the judiciary's power of judicial review. READ MORE Dred Scott Banner notes that the decision of Chief Justice Roger Taney in Dred Scott v Sandford (1857) is often cited as one of the most shameful opinions in the history of the court. In Dred Scott, the court ruled that people of African descent, whether enslaved or free, were not and could never be citizens of the United States and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court. Dred Scott would go on to play a significant role in hastening the onset of the American Civil War in 1861. During the Chief Justiceship of Earl Warren (1953-1969), the court ushered in the most liberal period of its history. During this period, the court determined seminal cases such as Brown v Board of Education (1954) which banned the segregation of public schools, Miranda v Arizona (1966) which ruled that the police must warn a person of their constitutional rights, before conducting an interrogation and New York Times Co. v Sullivan (1964) which ruled the freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment to the constitution limited the ability of public officials to sue for defamation. The author notes that the US supreme court is not apolitical. The court is exposed to politics in a number of different ways, including through the appointment of its justices. When a vacancy arises, the president nominates a candidate for appointment and the Senate confirms their appointment. Traditionally, Republican presidents have appointed conservative justices while Democratic presidents have appointed more liberally minded members of the bench. Roe v Wade Arguably the most controversial decision of the court in the past century concerned abortion rights. In Roe v Wade (1973) the court found that the US constitution protected the right to have an abortion before the point of foetal viability. Given the polarisation of views on social issues, there was an immediate call for the overturn of Roe. The US constitution, similar to other modern constitutions, can evolve over time and the court can revisit its earlier decisions if the make-up of its bench shifts and social norms evolve. Following a number of Republican appointed justices, the court now leans towards a conservative interpretation of the constitution. In 2022, the court was prepared to reconsider Roe in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization. In Dobbs, the court ruled that the constitution does not confer a right to abortion, thereby overruling the controversial decision in Roe. The decision in Dodds has caused a legal and social cataclysm in the United States. Arguably the most controversial decision of the court in the past century concerned abortion rights. Photograph: Getty Images Several States moved quickly to ban abortion, and the Roe/ Dodds line of case law is likely to reverberate in the United States for many years to come. The author brings the history of the court up to the present and considers a number of appeals to the court, brought by President Donald Trump, on various issues including the 2020 United States presidential election. Banner notes that Trump has a very poor success rate before the court. While this is certainly an enlightening history of the court, there are aspects of the court's history which are considered in a summary manner only. For example, the book concentrates on the liberal period of the Warren Court but pays little attention to the Watergate scandal and its political and legal fallout. That said, Banner, has authored an excellent, comprehensive and engaging one-volume history of, as the title enunciates, possibly the most powerful court in the world. Dr James Meighan is a practising lawyer and holds a PhD in constitutional history from the University of Limerick.
