Product Description

In The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution, readers will follow the Supreme Court as it uses the Constitution as a fig leaf to cover its blatant seizing of the people's right to govern themselves through elections. Gutzman unveils the radical inconsistency between constitutional law and the rule of law, and shows why and how the Supreme Court should be reined in to the proper role assigned to it by the Founders.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #5197 in Books
• Published on: 2007-06-11
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 272 pages

From the Inside Flap
The Constitution of the United States created a representative republic marked by federalism and the separation of powers. Yet numerous federal judges--led by the Supreme Court--have used the Constitution as a blank check to substitute their own views on hot-button issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and samesex marriage for perfectly constitutional laws enacted by We the People through our elected representatives.

Now, The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution shows that there is very little relationship between the Constitution as ratified by the thirteen original states more than two centuries ago and the "constitutional law" imposed upon us since then. Instead of the system of state-level decision makers and elected officials the Constitution was intended to create, judges have given us a highly centralized system in which bureaucrats and appointed--not elected--officials make most of the important policies.

In The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution, Professor Kevin Gutzman, who holds advanced degrees in both law and American history:

* explains how the Constitution was understood by the founders who wrote it and the people who ratified it * follows the Supreme Court as it uses the fig leaf of the Constitution to cover its naked usurpation of the rights and powers the Constitution explicitly reserves to the states and to the people * shows how we slid from the Constitution's republican federal government, with its very limited powers, to an unrepublican "judgeocracy" with limitless powers * reveals how huge swaths of American law and society were remade in the wake of Supreme Court rulings * reveals how the Fourteenth Amendment has been twisted to use the Bill of Rights as a check on state power instead of on federal power, as originally intended * exposes the radical inconsistency between "constitutional law" and the rule of law * contends that the judges who receive the most attention in history books are celebrated for acting against the Constitution rather than for it

As Professor Gutzman shows, constitutional law is supposed to apply the Constitution's plain meaning to prevent judges, presidents, and congresses from overstepping their authority. If we want to return to the founding fathers' vision of the Republic, if we want the Constitution enforced in the way it was explained to the people at the time of its ratification, then we have to overcome the "received wisdom" about what constitutional law is. The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution is an important step in that direction.

About the Author
Kevin R. C. Gutzman, J.D., Ph.D. is associate professor of American history at Western Connecticut State University. He received his Master of Public Affairs from the University of Texas, his J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in American history from the University of Virginia. Dr. Gutzman is the author of Virginia's American Revolution: From Dominion to Republic, 1776-1840 and was a featured expert in the documentary film John Marshall: Citizen, Statesman, and Jurist. He has written scores of articles and encyclopedia entries, as well as reviews of books, films, and exhibitions for magazines academic and popular. He lives in Bethel, Connecticut, with his three children.

Customer Reviews

Great Book
I wish more books were this quick and "easy" to read and packed as much information into it!

For anyone who is either studying early american history or the constitution this is a must read!

very good
Learned a lot, and I highly recommend. I concur with many other reviewers. Word of warning, don't listen to audio CD whilst driving, as it may cause you to go into a trance. The voice is very droning.

Good in the areas it addresses but too narrow in scope
The areas that this book covers are generally covered well; however, I was hoping for a book that was broader in scope. It really ought to be called "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Judicial Tyranny" or something to that effect as this is the area that the author focuses the most on.

He did do a good job covering judicial tyranny and explaining how the judicial branch has far exceeded the power the Founding Fathers intended it to have. He also provides an excellent overview of the history of the Constitution and the various conventions, which I learned a great deal from.

However, legislative and executive tyranny and abuse of the Constitution only receive brief mentions; for example, he addresses some of Abraham Lincoln's more blatant violations of the Constitution and does a good job covering the problem of secession but doesn't address more contemporary Constitutional issues like the PATRIOT Act, military commissions, secret prisons, and undeclared wars. These are some of the most hotly contested issues in Constitutional law right now and there have been several court rulings on them, so the book would've been more relevant if these issues had been addressed.

Another issue I was surprised the author omitted was the whole issue of Constitutional interpretation, which I consider a serious problem with the book. He simply assumes originalism without explaining or defending it, and he doesn't really distinguish between the different kinds of textualism (textualism vs. authorial intent). Given his intended audience, there's a pretty good chance that many people will either not understand originalism or disagree with it outright (e.g. proponents of the "living Constitution" theory of interpretation), so he really should have addressed this.

With that said, this book is still very informative and provides an important perspective on a number of issues, so it receives my recommendation.