Scan barcode
mkpatt's review
5.0
I don't always agree with the late Justice Scalia, but we agree more often than not. This book offers a pretty good insight into his thinking and analysis process. There are critiques and criticisms by constitutional scholars and a sort of back and forth on issues of principles of constitutional interpretation that make for fascinating reading if you're interested in how he reached the conclusions that he did. I definitely think this is worth the time to read.
imclaugh's review
5.0
Stimulating. Scalia is witty and trenchant, and the respondents provide compelling counterarguments that really expose the basic premises of constitutional interpretation and our the blindnesses imposed by culture, location, and tradition.
sheahbartlett's review
3.0
Ah, Scalia. I have such conflicted feelings towards this Supreme Court Justice. On one hand, I find myself disagreeing with multiple decisions and I loathe his method of interpretation. However, this book was an interesting look into his head, and I clearly outlines his reasoning for his methods. He's a good writer, and I always have been entertained by his opinions. If you have any interest in the SCOTUS, I would recommend this book.
tiredpanda's review
2.0
I didn't not agree with Justice Scalia, but I liked how he had commentary with other legal scholars, although I didn't agree with a few of them either. Still, a quick read and interesting insight into interpretation.
nutfreenerd's review against another edition
Read for my con law class--wow, lots to think about now...
bibliostatic's review
4.0
This book confirmed forever my status as a law geek--I got so excited reading this that I stayed up late to finish it. What I found so interesting was not just Scalia's articulation of his principles of statutory interpretation, although it was the first I'd read of anyone setting out some sort of reasoned approach to reading statutes (and I'm not so sure Scalia always follows his stated approach), but, more importantly, the essays in response to his initial response illuminated some of the issues and problems of figuring out what a statute's supposed to mean.
More...