Fans pick 37 books like The American Supreme Court

In this majestic study Friedman explores the relationship between public opinion and Supreme Court decisions over American history. 

Friedman’s central argument is that the Supreme Court does not stand apart from the rest of the society in which it operates. Building on the work of Robert McCloskey and Robert Dahl, Friedman argues that over time the Supreme Court reflects the views of society at large. 

The book is very well-researched and filled with fascinating, sometimes delightful, historical tidbits. It is written for an educated general audience.

Lucas Powe’s magnificent study focuses on the relationship between the Supreme Court and elites throughout American history. 

The Court, Powe argues, is not an independent institution dedicated to protecting the rights of the disadvantaged. Rather, it works in tandem with elites to further their interests. The book is beautifully written and persuasively argued.

Justice William Brennan reportedly would tell his new law clerks each year that the most important thing to understand about the Supreme Court was the number five. 

He meant that it takes the votes of five justices to set precedent and change the law. In this very readable study Epstein & Knight explore how justices act if they wish to move the law as close as possible to their preferred outcome. 

Based on careful reading of the papers of four Justices, Epstein & Knight make a persuasive case that justices who wish to change the law act strategically. That is, rather than casting a vote based on what they belief is the legally correct outcome, they often join majorities that don’t reflect their genuine beliefs but move the law closer to them.

How do Supreme Court justices make decisions? Law students are taught that justices apply a consistent and principled jurisprudence to examine the facts of the case before them, precedent, and the statue or constitutional provision at issue. 

Segal and Spaeth argue that this understanding is a myth.  Rather, they argue that Supreme Court justices base their decisions on their attitudes, values, and political preferences. Using the highly reliable US Supreme Court Judicial Data Base, compiled by Professor Spaeth, their analysis explains and predicts Supreme Court decisions with a stunning degree of accuracy. 

Their conclusion is that debates over originalism, judicial activism, judicial restraint, and the like are simply a distraction that hides the true reason justices decide cases.

There’s no one I like to read more about constitutional law than Akhil Amar. He has an incredible breadth of knowledge that’s matched by an amazing depth of insight. In this book, he goes through the constitution, clause by clause, and finds something new and unexpected to say about almost all of them. If you really want to understand the constitution, this is the definitive book. 

For all the drama of the Philadelphia Convention, it would have been an empty exercise had the American people not ratified the charter that it produced. Pauline Maier’s Ratification tells the surprisingly dramatic story of the state-by-state ratification process, one that encompasses not only the famous figures of the period but also everyday citizens. Maier’s book on the Declaration of Independence, American Scripture, is also excellent.

Some people assume that Lincoln at first faintly disapproved of slavery but did not think of abolishing it until the chance was almost forced upon him. Oakes argues, rather, that he hated slavery from the outset and held that the Constitution viewed it as temporary, something deplorable and to be disparaged. Armed with this knowledge, he was able in practice to strike at it whenever opportunity made that possible.

This one is my absolute favorite. The Collier brothers wrote numerous books on American history for kids and adults alike.

Even though I knew that the Constitutional Convention of 1787 resulted in the creation of the U.S. Constitution, many times as I was reading this book—which is aimed squarely at adults—I found myself thinking, “I can’t wait to see how this ends!” The book is really that suspenseful, and reads like a novel.

The authors are especially good at describing the personalities of the players. My favorite is their analysis of the father-son nature of the bond between George Washington and Alexander Hamilton, who served as the general’s aide during the Revolutionary War.

I am willing to bet most fans of the musical Hamilton never quite grasped the nuances of that relationship. I also really loved their description of a famous moment in the deliberations when George Washington loses his… show more.

I’m not a Constitutional or legal scholar. If anything, I’d be considered a biographer, since my book focuses on the life stories of the men behind the document. For that reason, I’m deliberately omitting any books that discuss the ramifications of the Constitution in modern times.

But I do enjoy this book, by a journalist and Harvard Law School graduate, which carefully breaks down each of the Constitution’s seven Articles and 27 Amendments, and carefully spells out in plain language the meaning of each. Yes, there are plenty of readers who will take issue with the specifics, but I find that Monk’s treatment is even-handed, and she sprinkles the text with asides, quotes, and opinions from top thinkers along the way.

To understand the political struggles of the 1790s, read the Federalist Papers this way: first read all those attributed to Hamilton, then those attributed to Madison, and finish up with the five attributed to Jay.

You will find Hamilton urging an energetic executive and a prepared military and hinting at the need for a financial system including a unified national debt and a national bank. You will see Madison more concerned with countering the irresponsible actions of state legislatures and cabining in the power of one branch of government by incentivizing other branches to check it.

As for Jay, you may be surprised that this resident of the most ethnically and culturally diverse colony and state, New York, assures readers that Americans all share an identical religion though he himself was the descendant of Calvinist French Huguenots—a persecuted folk in what had been a century of violent religious wars.