The Invisible Constitution (Inalienable Rights) | 
 enlarge
| Author: Laurence H. Tribe
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
Category: Book
List Price: $19.95
Buy New: $11.24
You Save: $8.71 (44%)
New (39) Used (9) Collectible (1) from $10.00
Rating:  5 reviews
Sales Rank: 36370
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 304
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 8.4 x 5.6 x 1.1
ISBN: 019530425X
Dewey Decimal Number: 342.7302
EAN: 9780195304251
ASIN: 019530425X
Publication Date: September 17, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
As everyone knows, the United States Constitution is a tangible, visible document. Many see it in fact as a sacred text, holding no meaning other than that which is clearly visible on the page. Yet as renowned legal scholar Laurence Tribe shows, what is not written in the Constitution plays a key role in its interpretation. Indeed some of the most contentious Constitutional debates of our time hinge on the extent to which it can admit of divergent readings.
In The Invisible Constitution, Tribe argues that there is an unseen constitution--impalpable but powerful--that accompanies the parchment version. It is the visible document's shadow, its dark matter: always there and possessing some of its key meanings and values despite its absence on the page. As Tribe illustrates, some of our most cherished and widely held beliefs about constitutional rights are not part of the written document, but can only be deduced by piecing together hints and clues from it. Moreover, some passages of the Constitution do not even hold today despite their continuing existence. Amendments may have fundamentally altered what the Constitution originally said about slavery and voting rights, yet the old provisos about each are still in the text, unrevised. Through a variety of historical episodes and key constitutional cases, Tribe brings to life this invisible constitution, showing how it has evolved and how it works. Detailing its invisible structures and principles, Tribe compellingly demonstrates the invisible constitution's existence and operative power.
Remarkably original, keenly perceptive, and written with Tribe's trademark analytical flair, this latest volume in Oxford's Inalienable Rights series offers a new way of understanding many of the central constitutional debates of our time.
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Difficult Read December 21, 2008
2 out of 5 found this review helpful
I was very interested in the topic and love to read, but I could not drag myself beyond the first few chapters.
Our book group from various professions found "Invisible Constitution" "dense" and difficult reading. Most of the group finished less than half the book. A few brave souls finished and found it enlightening. They had to re-read many sentences to grasp their meaning.
Reading "Invisible Constitution" was like reading the long sentences of Julius Caesar in 3rd year Latin.
Had I graduated in law, I might have followed the thoughts more easily - or perhaps not.
I greatly respect Professor Tribe, but I will be reluctant to begin another of his books.
 What's in the Constitution besides what's in it? December 14, 2008
2 out of 5 found this review helpful
There is a great deal more in constitutional law than is contained in the spare, sparse language of the U.S. Constitution. Or at lease Laurence Tribe believes so. Mr. Tribe is a constitutional law professor at Harvard Law School. Other than the justices on the supreme court, there is really no better authority on what constitutional law contains. Yet there is disagreement about this. Justice Antonin Scalia is well known for his strict adherence to the written words of the Constitution.
Consider, however, the words of article IX of the Bill of Rights:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Professor Tribe argues that the words of this clause are a huge gap through which truckloads of rights, unknown to James Madison or John Marshall, can be driven. How, then can we decide what is a right retained by the people and what is a kooky, left wing idea, best left in the dust bin of history?
Tribe offers six methods that jurists have used to think about, and argue for, these invisible constitutional rights. First the geometric construction, connecting the dots between different articles of the constitution. This is how the much argued right to privacy has been derived. Nowhere does the constitution mention the word "privacy." It does say, though "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. " and "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." When you put them together you get a more general concept that the government should leave people alone, especially in their own homes, but also in their possessions and their bodies, in short - privacy.
Another method of constructing constitutional rights described by Tribe are the geodesic - building a dome, like Buckminster Fuller, again out of already existing rights, to protect the freedoms of the individual. The global is another, reinforcing ones argument by reference to laws and practices in other countries. Justice Scalia has been guilty of this practice himself, according to professor Tribe. The geological, unearthing evidence of the intent of the founding fathers in historical sources is the fourth method. The gravitational, where he makes an argument based on Einstein's relativity theory and argues that laws create distortions of the social space time continuum is another. (did I mention that some of this is kind of hard to follow?) And finally the gyroscopic, in which the force of previously made decisions in the court help to stabilize the interpretation of the constitution by weight of their precedent, even when they are wrong.
Professor Tribe is obviously a really smart person and he has had the help of some other really smart people over the years, including a young research assistant who has gone on to bigger things, a fellow named Barry Obama. I tended to go all glassy eyed reading some of Tribe's explanations. Me and Sarah Palin are probably not destined to sit on the Supreme Court, I would guess. He has almost made me a strict constructionist, but then he did convince me that strict constructionists are most strict when construction arguments against things that the personally don't care for and are a lot looser when they argue for something that suits them.
Disappointingly Wordy December 7, 2008
4 out of 8 found this review helpful
I confess I'm writing this review having only read 58 of its 211 pages. Sadly, he still hasn't gotten to the subject. This first 25% is all introduction where he writes, "This book is about..." and "This book will..." but he never (yet) does what he promises, which is to tell us about the Invisible Constitution.
My sense is the writer has had an epiphany so brilliant (at least in his own mind) that he's entranced by it. I don't want to know what he's "going to" write about. It's assumed he's writing about something, and I'm bored silly waiting to get down to his subject.
Based on this sample of his writing, I'm not optimistic that when he finally gets to his subject he'll explain it well. So far, it's not only boring and unfocused, it's also muddy.
That said, this guy is supposed to be a great constitutional scholar, so I'm going to try to wade through the rest in the hopes of learning something.
excellent and informative November 18, 2008
7 out of 12 found this review helpful
I've finally found it!!! The book more soporific than my dissertation!!! Let me begin my review by saying that, as more an expansionist than a textualist like his colleague from Yale Law, Tribe presents a most agreeable argument to me. Basically, it is argued that the constitution is more than just a sheet of paper with precise words written on it that should not be interpreted by the US Supreme Court, but, rather modified by the citizens. Tribe argues that, of necessity, the USSC must interpret and expand upon our constitutional understandings. He writes about what he's going to say, how it's going to be said, what is being said, and what was just said, leaving very few comments as brilliant as the author is. That's unfortunate, because if he were half as persuasive as Professor Amar, many Americans might have been persuaded by the logic of his arguments. If he had been just a bit more persuasive, perhaps more people might have understood and agreed with his premises. Certainly, I believe him, that more general citizens are interpretivists whereas more scholars might be more inclined toward textualism. By the way, I loved the dust jacket, semi-opaque over a copy of the constitution. I'd love to hear him speak somewhere sometime. I'd purchase this book again and read it again. I'd give him an A+ for billiance and argument but a B- due to limitations on readibility.
I am unable to review what I have never received! October 25, 2008
2 out of 39 found this review helpful
I really wanted to read this book as Prof. Tribe is quite a wonderful explicator of our Constitutional history - unfortunately, I never received my order - I have never received follow-up explanations - nor do I know whether any charges for the lost order have been cleared - yes, I am truly pissed........ AnneDaly
|
|
|
