Men in Black
Levin, Mark R.
Hunter James
Does Mark Levin describe how John Marshall, who one of the nation's most astute constitutionalists, the late Sen. Sam Ervin,called "our greatest justice" rewrote the Constitution to create the concept of Judicial Review and mocked the whole idea of what the Founders intended the court to be--how in a single paragraph he created the corrupt institution that today writes all of our laws, at least all that are too controversial for the likes a cringing Congress to deal with. Why risk their necks with the people back home? Let the Court take all the responsibility. I wish Levin would write a whole book on this sorry excuse of a chief justice.
Not Rated
Very Good! This book shows the problems with an out-of-control federal court system and what we should do about it. This is one book that the ACLU, Senate {Judiciary Committee} Democrats, People for the American Way, NARAL, NAACP, and terrorist's "rights" groups do not want you to read because it shows how they have hijacked the courts.
There is great content in the chapters, but better use of headings would be helpful. Several chapters include one subheading (?), which makes the organization within the chapters appear to be an afterthought. Additionally, footnotes (or even end of chapter notes) would be preferable to the endnotes dumped at the end of the book. This is a book that is insufficient for a legal scholar, but is more than acceptable if you're looking to understand the screwed up history a particular S.C. decision for discussion purposes. Mark is "no Ann Coulter," but few are.
This book makes you think. Mark Levin has written a well-researched book pointing out some disturbing issues with the federal courts in America. The logic of some of the decisions that the Supreme Court has made is mind-boggling. While it is obvious to those that know of Mark Levin he comes down very hard on the judiciary of the United States. It is very difficult to see any consistency of the rulings made at times during our history.
Some reviewers have said that Levin’s book muddies the issues and rulings, but I have to whole-heartedly disagree. I think this book brings to the forefront some of the issues facing us as we head into a time where a Supreme Court Justice could be nominated. The reviewers that disagree that there is any judicial activism going on please explain some of the contradictions made by the court. Free speech is not protected when talking about political candidates but child porn is? This makes absolutely no sense to me. Others accuse Levin of only calling decisions activist when he personally disagrees with them. Perhaps he disagrees with them because they are based on “liberal” interpretation of the constitution of the United States. I find that people that prefer this “liberal” interpretation have very little knowledge of what the framers intended and what the Constitution actually says. Mark Levin has no such gaps in his knowledge. The author does not like the decisions made by the Supreme Court that the author attacks because they poorly reasoned decisions that go in contrast with the Constitution. There are clear lines of authority in our government and the Supreme Court has consistently and increasingly crossed those lines.
The Congress needs to stand up to the judiciary and take back the legitimate powers that it holds by limiting what the judiciary can rule on. I don’t necessarily agree with term limits for judges because we would be right back to partisan politics when the judge came up for re-appointment. But the Congress can and should determine what the courts may rule on. The government is supposed to serve the people of the United States, not the liberal or conservative fringe groups (which rarely go this route, but conceivably could) that create cases to get the courts to rule in their favor.
Others have made the argument that the courts don’t make laws then only reinforce them or strike them down. If you believe this to be the case then your not paying attention to what’s been going on over the years. It’s a technicality that they don’t write the statutes but they control them by the precise wording of their rulings. Look at the major court cases mentioned in Men in Black. If at the time of Roe V. Wade the majority of American’s were against abortion and the courts don’t write law, how did we end up with legalized abortion in all cases in America? There was no way to give the people what they want? The legislators couldn’t write some laws that limited abortion? They can’t because the courts have decided that it is ALWAYS LEGAL even though that is not their job. Just as reviewers have written that the author calls judges activist because he doesn’t like their rulings, judges cannot strike down laws because they disagree with the laws or the morals behind the laws.
This is a great book and a must read that should shape the debate over the judiciary for years to come.
Men in Black, for the average reader who is interested in politics but not an attorney or judge, may find this book a bit obscure. I wondered what purpose Mr Levin wanted to accomplish: inform? educate? motivate? The topics he chose are absolutely timely and extremely relevant to all Americans. Each chapter could be a book in itself. While the book is packed with information, it is extremely difficult for many of us "average" people to grasp. His own scholarly intelligence has gotten in his way of getting down to our level. Perhaps the book was written to let his peers know how brilliant he really is as opposed to educating, informing or motivating to action? Without knowing his purpose it is difficult to know how to evaluate the book appropriately. I can say the following however if the intent is to:
1. Educate: the book is poorly organized and presented, i.e., the objectives, purpose, goals within the chapters
2. Inform: it is difficult for the reader to connect the dots from chapter to chapter and discern how the chapters relate to the excellent key points he brings out
3. Motivate: what can we do? Mr. Levin does not offer much in the way of solutions if that is his purpose. Does he want to offer civics courses on the Consititution to the public? Does he want to start a national dialogue?
The end result is my getting a headache trying to take notes, study, and extract the value of out of his content. My fellow political book club members ALL failed to finish the book because they thought it was difficult to read. They did agree that the topic was a very good one however.
a must read, when finished pass along to a friend, tell them to do the same.
Joe, Auburn, AL
What else can I add... the Supreme's are takng over the Federal Gov. Time to take back some of their self ordained power and put it back from where it came. .the people!
Great book!!!
JESSE MOONEY
Mark Levin makes to-the-point remarks, then backs them up with solid evidence. Laid out well. Very easy to read and understand! Extremely important for those interested in Constitutional and judicial issues.
I find it brilliant, easily understood for anyone to read, concise, and it's a real crime that books such as this are not advertised to the public like those disgusting books that use sex, immorality, gross theft of our honor and faith why are they advertised everywhere and books such as this you barely hear about?