Product Description

Many rights that Americans cherish today go unmentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Where do these freedoms come from? John V. Orth answers that question in this unique and gem-like history of due process.

No person's life, liberty, or property may be taken without due process of law. What exactly that means has been one of the most frequently asked questions in American constitutional history. Today, the answer is usually given in two parts: what procedures the government must follow and--in exceptional cases--what the government cannot do even if it follows the proper procedures. The procedural aspect of this answer has been far less controversial than substantive due process, which at one time limited government regulation of business and today forbids the states from outlawing abortions.

Due process of law, as a phrase and as a concept, was already old at the time it was adopted by American constitution-writers, both state and federal. Mindful of the English background and of constitutional developments in the several states, Orth in a succinct and readable narrative traces the history of due process, from its origins in medieval England to its applications in the latest cases.

Departing from the usual approach to American constitutional law, Orth places the history of due process in the larger context of the common law. To a degree not always appreciated today, constitutional law advances in the same case-by-case manner as other legal rules. In that light, Orth concentrates on the general maxims or paradigms that guided the judges in their decisions of specific cases. Uncovering the links between one case and another, Orth describes how a commitment to fair procedures made way for an emphasis on the protection of property rights, which in turn led to a heightened sensitivity to individual rights in general.

This unconventional history of the concept of due process heightens the reader's understanding of an important and vexed question of Anglo-American law and constitutionalism. Tracing the evolution of substantive due process through paradigmatic and exemplary cases, Orth explains in understandable terms the sources of controversial judicial rulings like Roe v. Wade.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #498182 in Books
• Published on: 2003-03
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 116 pages

From Booklist
Orth, a law professor, presents an accessible overview of the concept of due process of law as it has evolved over the centuries. Although well rooted in British case law precedent, certain of the concepts of due process are associated with pre-precedents or what some call natural law. Orth takes the reader through medieval British history, where those concepts are rooted, up to the American constitutional expansion and modification of such concepts. Out of these assumptions about natural law certain models were developed, such as one cannot make people judge in their own case as a matter of procedural due process, or taking from A to give to B as a example of economically substantive due process. Then the noneconomic substantive due process issues evolved within the U.S. constitutional law with concepts such as liberty, privacy, and other enunciated freedoms. Orth reflects on the history of legal conceptual developments that form our American concept of due process of law. Lawyers, historians, constitutional scholars, and observers of the Supreme Court will find this book a most interesting read. Vernon Ford
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

From the Back Cover
A wonderfully lucid overview of due process as a limitation on the powers of govern-ment, summing up a half-millennium of legal development in clear yet rigorously accurate prose. A valuable work for all students of constitutional law.--William M. Wiecek, author of Liberty Under Law: The Supreme Court in American Life

Lucid, accessible, accurate, and marvelously well told, Orth's book deserves a prominent place on every educated lawyer's bookshelf.--William Van Alstyne, author of The First Amendment in the Twentieth Century

Orth's book is a gem. It has something for every reader, from legal historians to constitutional scholars to those simply interested in the Supreme Court's decisions.--Suzanna Sherry, coauthor of Desperately Seeking Certainty: The Misguided Quest for Constitutional Foundations

About the Author
John V. Orth is William Rand Kenan, Jr., Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His other books include Combination and Conspiracy: A Legal History of Trade Unionism, 1721-1906, The Judicial Power of the United States: The Eleventh Amendment in American History, and The North Carolina State Constitution: A Reference Guide.

Customer Reviews

A Brief Guide to Due Process Throught the Ages
I was assigned this book my Junior year at Washington University (Ranked 12th in the U.S) in my advanced government course. It was one of three, if memory serves, and I was to write a 20 page paper on its assertions and overall thesis. The paper was one-fifth the size of the book (perhaps more so because my paper was not double-spaced), but I found the book clear and wonderful. I still refer to this book now that I am looking toward law school. It is short, well-written and useful to the student who finds himself studying something so complex. I fully endorse it.

Who Would Read This Book?
In 102 pages of double-spaced text, Professor Orth outlines the development of due process law from its roots in Magna Carta to Supreme Court cases such as Lochner v. New York and Roe v. Wade. Although Orth refers to political developments such as the rise of parliament and Roosevelt's court-packing plan, for the most part he stays focused on the logic (or "paradigms") underlying due process law, suggesting (p. 102) that the law has unfolded as a "continuous series" of cases building on earlier conceptions of due process. Others might attribute the notorious twists and turns in this area to political shifts in the courts and society at large. In any event, it's hard to know who would benefit from or enjoy Orth's book. It's too sketchy to be of use to lawyers or law students and too devoid of political history of judicial biography to be of interest to laymen. On the other hand, it's clearly-written -- and very short.