Supreme Inequality: The Supreme Court's Fifty-Year Battle for a More Unjust America

I haven't finished it yet, but I have enjoyed the author's writing style and how easy he made it to absorb such critical information. Everyone should be aware of what's inside this book.

Adam Cohen has provided us with a spectacularly argued and well thought out book regarding the "evolution" of the Supreme Court over the last 50 years. As a history book, this book is extremely well crafted and consistently shows the march through time that the court has taken over the last half-century.As a legal analysis, obviously Cohen has selected the cases that prove his point, but he has chosen from a wide variety of cases, including those with implications in the criminal, civil, and election arenas.Cohen has subtitled his book "The Supreme Court's fifty-year battle for a more unjust America", and he demonstrates this very well as he shows how the court, starting with the Burger years (1969-1986) were the origins of the conservative revolution and a focus on financial interests of companies and white collar executives rather than the poor and indigent that the Warren court (1953-1969) focused on.If I only had one book on the history of the court to read this year, this would be it - I think it does a wonderful job of demonstrating how the conservatives, as personified in the judiciary, have continued to drive this country to the right and ensure that the 1% remains just that - a haven for the rich & privileged.

Too much public attention when it comes to the Supreme Court gets directed to too few subjects. The court addresses a lot of territory, and this book offers an excellent overview of much of it. A great civic education (as well as powerful advocacy).

Impressive book showing the history of the Supreme Court in regards to inequality. Well written / fast reading. I hope it is widely read.One possible disagreement with the author; He talks on page 267 about an arrested person having his mouth swabbed for a DNA sample that then links him to another crime. The author seems to think that this is wrong. If all the DNA sample is used for is to match the suspect to another crime then how is this different than if it were the suspect's fingerprints (which I assume was also taken) that had been what was used for linking him to another crime? Isn't a DNA sample just a modern version of identification, similar conceptually to a fingerprint?

While I have lived through the 50-plus years covered by Cohen's book as a reasonably well-informed adult, I was unaware of the severe and sustained right turn of the U. S. Supreme Court. The so-called Burger, Rehnquist and Roberts courts have undermined our very existence by attacking, denying and weakening rights and access to basic services for millions of U. S. citizens. One observation impressed on me by the book that was surprising was the extent to which Justice Sandra Day O'Connor contributed to the erosion of these rights and services. I thought she was more centrist, more thoughtful. I was wrong. This is one of the most profound books I have read recently.

A concise and effective presentation of how the Republican attempt to pack the court with conservatives has had a the detrimental effect on poor and minorities. A disconcerting pattern since the Nixon administration.

The author provides a well documented report how Nixon destroyed the Supreme Court concern for the middle-class and change the court to provide the one percent with to increased power to keep the rest of society under their their thumb

Great value, fast shipping, item as described. Thank you.