In The Nine, acclaimed journalist Jeffrey Toobin takes us into the chambers of the most important—and secret—legal body in our country, the Supreme Court, revealing the complex dynamic among the nine people who decide the law of the land. An institution at a moment of transition, the Court now stands at a crucial point, with major changes in store on such issues as abortion, civil rights, and church-state relations. Based on exclusive interviews with the justices and with a keen sense of the Court’s history and the trajectory of its future, Jeffrey Toobin creates in The Nine a riveting story of one of the most important forces in American life today.

In their professional lives courtroom lawyers must do these two things well: speak persuasively and write persuasively. In this noteworthy book, two of the most noted legal writers of our day Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner systematically present every important idea about judicial persuasion in a fresh, entertaining way. Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges is a guide for novice and experienced litigators alike. It covers the essentials of sound legal reasoning, including how to develop the syllogism that underlies any argument. From there the authors explain the art of brief-writing, especially what to include and what to omit, so that you can induce the judge to focus closely on your arguments. Finally, they show what it takes to succeed in oral argument. The opinions of Justice Scalia are legendary for their sharp insights, biting wit, and memorable phrasing. The writings of Bryan A. Garner, editor in chief of Black s Law Dictionary®, are respected inside and outside legal circles for their practical guidance on the art of writing and advocacy. Together the Scalia-Garner team has produced a fresh, innovative approach to a timeless topic.

The bestselling Men in Black-first time in paperback! Lawyer and hugely popular radio talk show host Mark Levin throws the book at out-of-control liberal judges who ignore the Constitution, dismantle the rights of American citizens, and make up their own coercive law from the bench.

A tiny, ebullient Jew who started as America's leading liberal and ended as its most famous judicial conservative. A Klansman who became an absolutist advocate of free speech and civil rights. A backcountry lawyer who started off trying cases about cows and went on to conduct the most important international trial ever. A self-invented, tall-tale Westerner who narrowly missed the presidency but expanded individual freedom beyond what anyone before had dreamed. Four more different men could hardly be imagined. Yet they had certain things in common. Each was a self-made man who came from humble beginnings on the edge of poverty. Each had driving ambition and a will to succeed. Each was, in his own way, a genius. They began as close allies and friends of FDR, but the quest to shape a new Constitution led them to competition and sometimes outright warfare. SCORPIONS tells the story of these four great justices: their relationship with Roosevelt, with each other, and with the turbulent world of the Great Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. It also serves as a history of the modern Constitution itself.

Open this book and step into America's court system! What's it like to be a judge? A prosecutor? A defense attorney? With Neubauer's best-selling book, you'll find out! This fascinating and well-researched text gives you the sense of being in the courthouse-of what it is like to work in and be a part of the system. This concept of the courthouse "players" illustrates each person's important role in bringing a case through the court process. Throughout the text, Neubauer highlights not only the pivotal role of the criminal courts within the criminal justice system but also the court's importance and impact on society as a whole.

This text offers current information and examples of mass media law. It includes the implications of the O.J. Simpson trial on cameras in the courtroom, jury selection and sequestering juries. The book begins by giving an explanation of the Bill of Rights and the American legal system.

Henry Friendly is frequently grouped with Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo, and Learned Hand as the best American jurists of the twentieth century. In this first, comprehensive biography of Friendly, Dorsen opens a unique window onto how a judge of this caliber thinks and decides cases, and how Friendly lived his life. (20120115)

Mary Beth Beazley s highly regarded A Practical Guide to Appellate Advocacy, Third Edition, is a comprehensive student-focused guide to writing appellate briefs. Written in an understandable, direct writing style, this concise paperback s effective structure centers on a four-point approach to writing and breaks each point down into key elements that are then treated in-depth. This accessible paperback: provides a complete introduction to the techniques and process of writing appellate briefs emphasizes the process approach to writing, beginning with large-scale issues such as content and organization, moving to smaller-scale issues such as signals to the reader, and ending on the smallest-scale concerns of format and polishing methods includes an appendix with four sample briefs with annotations that identify strengths of the brief and/or why the writer chose a particular technique shows students how to effectively use abstract formulas such as IRAC or CREXAC when they are writing teaches students how to revise and improve their work by using the self-graded draft Improvements to the updated Third Edition include: Chapters have been reorganized to separate motion briefs from appellate briefs to allow professors to assign focused readings more easily The section on standards of review for a motion to dismiss has been updated to reflect Supreme Court decisions in Twombly and Iqbal Enhanced and refined discussions of: How to write effective topic sentences arguing that a rule does or does not apply to the case Using introductory material effectively to set the stage for the argument How to "harvest" arguments from non-mandatory courts How and where to deal with opponent's arguments A Practical Guide to Appellate Advocacy, Third Edition, offers practical advice with specific techniques that encourages students to develop new skills and greater confidence.

In America's courtooms, the verdict is laughter.Sit back and enjoy a collection of verbatim exchanges from the halls of justice, where defendants and plaintiffs, lawyers and witnesses, juries and judges, collide to produce memorably insane comedy. The Court: "The charge here is theft of frozen chickens. Are you the defendant, sir?" Defendant: "No, sir, I'm the guy who stole the chickens."

We are all familiar with the image of the immensely clever judge who discerns the best rule of common law for the case at hand. According to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a judge like this can maneuver through earlier cases to achieve the desired aim--"distinguishing one prior case on his left, straight-arming another one on his right, high-stepping away from another precedent about to tackle him from the rear, until (bravo!) he reaches the goal--good law." But is this common-law mindset, which is appropriate in its place, suitable also in statutory and constitutional interpretation? In a witty and trenchant essay, Justice Scalia answers this question with a resounding negative.In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, Scalia urges that judges resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawgivers meant rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. Eschewing the judicial lawmaking that is the essence of common law, judges should interpret statutes and regulations by focusing on the text itself. Scalia then extends this principle to constitutional law. He proposes that we abandon the notion of an everchanging Constitution and pay attention to the Constitution's original meaning. Although not subscribing to the "strict constructionism" that would prevent applying the Constitution to modern circumstances, Scalia emphatically rejects the idea that judges can properly "smuggle" in new rights or deny old rights by using the Due Process Clause, for instance. In fact, such judicial discretion might lead to the destruction of the Bill of Rights if a majority of the judges ever wished to reach that most undesirable of goals.This essay is followed by four commentaries by Professors Gordon Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary Ann Glendon, and Ronald Dworkin, who engage Justice Scalia's ideas about judicial interpretation from varying standpoints.