Positives The book is widely praised for its engaging, accessible, and fluid writing style, making complex legal and political topics understandable for a broad audience. Reviewers highlight its informative nature, offering readers a unique glimpse into the inner workings of the Supreme Court and the personalities of its justices. Many found it a diligently researched and entertaining narrative that humanizes these often-abstract figures through personal insights and anecdotes. It provides a comprehensive overview of the Court's functioning, the nomination process, and the major decisions made over a significant historical period, from the late 1970s to 2007. For many, it served as an excellent starting point for learning about the Supreme Court, enhancing their knowledge and understanding of this branch of government.
Negatives However, several reviewers note a noticeable liberal bias in the author's portrayal of justices and their decisions. Critics suggest that the author sometimes presents justices he disagrees with as petty or ideological, while those he aligns with are seen as compassionate and correct. Concerns were also raised about the heavy reliance on anonymous sources, which some felt undermined the book's objectivity and journalistic integrity, implying an agenda. A few reviewers found the book less rigorous than a scholarly work, comparing it more to an extended magazine article. Some felt that certain "revelations" were not new to those already familiar with the Court, and that the book was less sensationalistic than its title might suggest. The author's treatment of certain controversial cases was also cited as a point where his bias became particularly evident, leading some to question the book's overall balance.
Conclusion Despite these criticisms regarding bias and scholarly depth, the book is generally recommended as a valuable and enjoyable read. It is particularly suited for readers who are unfamiliar with the Supreme Court and wish for an accessible, narrative introduction to its history, members, and the political forces influencing its trajectory. The book effectively illustrates how individual personalities and political dynamics shape judicial outcomes, challenging any preconceived notions of the Court as a purely apolitical body. Readers interested in understanding the evolution of the Court from the Reagan era through the mid-2000s, and how its decisions connect to broader American politics, will find this a memorable and thought-provoking experience, providing essential context for current events.
