Men in Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America

Arrived on time as described

Mark R Levin's "Men in Black" may be the most important book of the year. It exposes the past, present (and warns us of a future)and shows us all how our Supreme Court Judges , (who are unelected, serve for life and yet , need not answer to anyone for their actions)are power hungry, and out of control. How Supreme court Judges freely " INTERPRET" and liberally change the laws written by The Original Framers of our Constitution simply based own THEIR OWN opinions, and AGENDAS It is written in "laymans terms...is a quick read what you will learn about our highest branch of the judiciary will astound you. Topics include....Due process for Al Qaeda prisoners,card blanche to illegal immigrants,the endorsing of racism,meddling in elections, silencing political debate, and mark finishes by telling us how to Restore our constitution, what WE can do about this. GET THIS BOOK!~ Dave in Carmel, NY

Levin has written a masterpiece that best expresses what many Americans, liberal and conservative alike, have felt for years. The importance of this book can't be underplayed, and I'm yet to see someone attack the book on its merits without DNC talking points. Levin: -Demonstrates that the Supreme Court is not made up of gods, the justices are human, and capable of error. Some have been brilliant, some have been lousy, some morally detestable. Their decisions do not carry infallability. Don't forget they wrote the Dred Scott decision in 1858 declaring that Black people are non-persons. The court couldn't have been more wrong. -Demonstrates how the Court selectively picks issues on its political agenda like the Texas Sodomy case, where the main crime was a domestic disturbance report of someone screaming and shooting a gun next door. How doe sthat end up at the Supreme Court? -How now the Supreme Court is undermining the Executive Branch by challenging the president's war time powers. See the chapter "Al Quida gets a lawyer". -Exposes the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill as unconstitutional and demonstrates impeccably how the court failed in its duty. -How the Supreme Court is imposing its social reform policy on the states. Some criticize Levin as attacking judicial activism while at the same time advocating it. This couldn't be further from the truth. When Levin says the court needs to overturn its earlier rulings since the 30's, it is because THOSE RULINGS NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Levin's book advocates the holding the Supreme Court accountable to its Constitutional duties, not to mere ideology be it left wing or right wing. Anyone looking for good information on the history of the Court and of the decisions impacting today's society would do well to purchase this book, RIGHT NOW!

It is a very curious, but undeniable fact that, at age 58, I observe that as my politics have not changed to any significant degree since my 20s (i.e. Vietnam/Watergate), the world around me has turned itself inside out. Our generation demanded answers, not evasions to the compelling and important issues of our time - and we were considered politically radical. Today, it is the reverse. Those who ask the questions, challenge the assumptions and "conventional wisdom" who are viewed as reactionary. This is nothing if not the other side of Alice's rabbit hole. Regrettably, it is not fantasy - but reality - and our courts have indeed usurped legislative power, without any checks or balances, to themselves. We have permitted this horrifying metastasis to occur - and it is time to beat it back. Mark Levin's text lays out in plain English both the history and the record of the legislative abuses of the judiciary branch of our government - one which, in the case of The Supreme Court, is neither elected nor accountable to anyone. This text should stand as required reading for all American citizens, and as the logical point of departure for the discussion of its issues, now long, long overdue. The only way we can truly govern ourselves is to take back the power of government for ourselves - to learn how the government is supposed to operate, and then to insist that it be done so, as the authors of our framing documents laid them out. To interpret the law is one thing - to corrupt it is quite another - and for any one branch to usurp unchecked power is the rallying cry for revolution, that is, the power of the ballot box - the demand for the reestablishment of the balance of power. Absolutely to be recommended - its critical message could not be more timely or important at this moment in our history.

Many historians talk about the huge increases in presidential power throughout history. Now however Mark Levin has done an excellent job of showing rather how the courts have, in effect, absolute power to push their social will on America. There is no checks and balances in place for activist judges. Their rulings are supreme. The book is also an excellent read to learn the history of the Supreme Court and various Supreme Court judges which presided over the court in the past. Whether you are liberal or conservative, you will find it hard to disagree with the points made in this book. Highly recommended.

There is arguably no issue of greater importance to the future of the American republic than how the coming war over nominations to the federal judiciary will turn out. President Bush has upped the ante considerably and admirably by making clear his intention to appoint to the bench only those who will take the Constitution seriously and who understand that interpretation is not the same thing as making public policy. He seeks those who will be guided by the framers' original intentions rather than the moral mood of the moment. As if to infuriate his critics all the more, the president has indicated that Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia -- originalists, both -- are his kind of judges. The very thought of more Thomases and Scalias has left the liberal apologists for judicial activism sputtering with rage and plotting further filibusters in an attempt to undermine the president's constitutional power of appointment. The stakes could not be higher. Will the federal courts generally, and the Supreme Court in particular, continue down the path of creating new rights out of whole cloth without any support in the Constitution itself -- giving the nation such things as the right to privacy, the right to abortion and the right to homosexual sodomy -- or will it be returned to the republican fold by carefully-chosen and vigorously-defended nominees who are properly committed to the idea of judicial restraint? Everyone who cares about this battle for American constitutionalism would be well advised to turn to Mark R. Levin's new book, "Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America." With a scholar's eye and an advocate's eloquence, Mr. Levin plunges to the heart of why this is a war that simply must be won. In place of constitutional government of limited and enumerated powers, he argues, we are careening toward nothing less than "a de facto judicial tyranny." Not since Raoul Berger's seminal "Government by Judiciary" has a book exposed so clearly the political dangers of ideologically freewheeling and constitutionally untethered judges being allowed -- indeed, encouraged -- to transform the Constitution. While most of the public's attention focuses on abortion and gay rights, Mr. Levin shows how many other areas of our basic constitutional law have been corrupted by judges willing to supplant the intentions of the framers with their own moral predilections. "Men in Black" surveys a broad political landscape that has come to be littered with the handiwork of justices who have forgotten their constitutional place. Here one can see how the Supreme Court has gone far beyond the right of privacy in sexual matters and has interfered with laws on everything from immigration to restricting virtual child pornography to the war on terror. One of the most helpful chapters is one that makes sense of the underlying issues in Bush v. Gore and why the Supreme Court did what it did -- and why it should never do it again. Perhaps the most i