Packing the Court: The Rise of Judicial Power and the Coming Crisis of the Supreme Court (2009)

Packing the Court examines the history and evolution of judicial power in the United States Supreme Court from the nation's founding through modern times. The book traces how the Court gained its current level of authority and influence over American life. Burns analyzes key historical moments when presidents attempted to shape the Supreme Court's ideological direction through strategic appointments and other measures. The narrative covers constitutional crises, landmark cases, and political battles that defined the relationship between the Court and other branches of government. The book pays particular attention to Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1937 court-packing scheme and its long-lasting implications for judicial politics. Historical profiles of influential justices and presidents provide context for the institutional power struggles. This work raises fundamental questions about judicial review, democratic accountability, and the proper role of an unelected judiciary in American democracy. The author presents a critical examination of whether the Supreme Court's current structure serves the constitutional system as intended.

Readers view this as a partisan critique of judicial review and conservative Supreme Court decisions. Many note Burns' clear liberal perspective and argument for term limits and court reform. Positives: - Clear writing style makes complex legal history accessible - Strong historical research and documentation - Compelling case studies of key court decisions - Thorough analysis of each Chief Justice's impact Negatives: - Several readers felt it was too ideologically slanted - Some found the proposed solutions unrealistic - Critics say it oversimplifies complex legal issues - Multiple readers noted factual errors about specific cases Ratings: Goodreads: 3.7/5 (127 ratings) Amazon: 3.5/5 (32 ratings) "More of a political manifesto than objective history" - Amazon reviewer "Excellent research but the bias is hard to ignore" - Goodreads review "Makes valid points about judicial overreach but solution seems impractical" - LibraryThing review

The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court by Jeffrey Toobin This book examines the Supreme Court's personalities, politics, and power dynamics from the Reagan era through the early 2000s.

Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. the Supreme Court by Jeff Shesol This work details FDR's court-packing attempt and the constitutional crisis it created during the New Deal era.

The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court by Bob Woodward The book reveals the inner workings and decision-making processes of the Supreme Court during the Burger Court years from 1969 to 1976.

Scorpions: The Battles and Triumphs of FDR's Great Supreme Court Justices by Noah Feldman This text follows four influential FDR-appointed Supreme Court justices who shaped American constitutional law in the twentieth century.

The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America by Jeffrey Rosen The book pairs influential Supreme Court justices throughout history to examine how their conflicts and collaborations shaped American law.

🔖 James MacGregor Burns, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his Roosevelt biography, wrote this book at age 90, making it one of his final works before his death in 2014. ⚖️ The book argues that every president from George Washington to George W. Bush has tried to influence the Supreme Court's ideology through strategic appointments. 📚 Burns controversially proposed that President Obama should consider refusing to enforce Supreme Court decisions he believed were wrong, sparking significant debate among legal scholars. 🏛️ The author traces how the Supreme Court's power of judicial review wasn't explicitly granted by the Constitution but rather established through Chief Justice John Marshall's decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803). ⚡ Despite being a respected presidential historian, Burns challenged conventional wisdom by suggesting the Supreme Court had become an undemocratic institution that needed major reform, including possibly eliminating lifetime appointments.