Out of Order: Stories from the History of the Supreme Court by Sandra Day O'Connor came up when I was searching for audio books with Supreme Court as a keyword so I thought I'd give it a shot.
Started: 10/25/2013
Completed: 11/7/2013
Recommendation: Recommend the audio version for those with an interest in US History
Recommended By: Nobody
Review:
Justice O'Connor seems to write her chapters as one might write a legal decision. Between chapters it is not unusual for the same historical fact to reappear often in the exact same way it was presented earlier. It feels like the book is a collection of presentations with the occasional chapter being a combination of several speeches. As a result, there is overlap between them. This is why I recommend the audio version...the overlaps are relatively small and easy to hear, but I can imagine reading the same thing over and over and thinking that she had said all she was going to say. Rather, I think that each time she addresses a major character or event at the court, she feels the need to set the historical precedent which led to the event itself. Hearing her describe these events with frequently the same inflection suggests that this is material that is familiar and important to her, kind of like a point that a teacher might repeat over and over in the hopes that a child would come to know the material through repetition alone.
Justice O'Connor's perspective alone is useful in understanding some of the seminal decisions for which she was a swing vote, but her sense of the other justices on the court--both current and historical was an interesting insight as well. She remains active in the Federal Court system, though she has retired from the Supreme Court. I enjoyed her fresh insights, her take on historical courts, and her severe and ardent dislike for circuit riding (which seems exceedingly well founded). After reading her work (in contrast to Justice Stephen's book) I feel like I've had a character sketch of Justices framed by their life, times, and decisions.
Justice O'Connor seems to write her chapters as one might write a legal decision. Between chapters it is not unusual for the same historical fact to reappear often in the exact same way it was presented earlier. It feels like the book is a collection of presentations with the occasional chapter being a combination of several speeches. As a result, there is overlap between them. This is why I recommend the audio version...the overlaps are relatively small and easy to hear, but I can imagine reading the same thing over and over and thinking that she had said all she was going to say. Rather, I think that each time she addresses a major character or event at the court, she feels the need to set the historical precedent which led to the event itself. Hearing her describe these events with frequently the same inflection suggests that this is material that is familiar and important to her, kind of like a point that a teacher might repeat over and over in the hopes that a child would come to know the material through repetition alone.
Justice O'Connor's perspective alone is useful in understanding some of the seminal decisions for which she was a swing vote, but her sense of the other justices on the court--both current and historical was an interesting insight as well. She remains active in the Federal Court system, though she has retired from the Supreme Court. I enjoyed her fresh insights, her take on historical courts, and her severe and ardent dislike for circuit riding (which seems exceedingly well founded). After reading her work (in contrast to Justice Stephen's book) I feel like I've had a character sketch of Justices framed by their life, times, and decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment