Book Description
A scathing portrait of contemporary executive power run amok, by the author of the original 1976 Church Committee report on executive abuse.
"In thirty-four years, I have repeatedly seen an erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job."—Vice President Dick Cheney
Thirty years after the Church Committee unearthed COINTELPRO and other instances of illicit executive behavior on the domestic and international fronts, the Bush administration has elevated the flaws identified by the committee into first principles of government.
Through a constellation of non-public laws and opaque, unaccountable institutions, the current administration has created a "secret presidency" run by classified presidential decisions and orders about national security. A hyperactive Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice is intent on eliminating checks on presidential power and testing that power's limits. Decisions are routinely executed at senior levels within the civilian administration without input from Congress or the federal courts, let alone our international allies. Secret NSA spying at home is the most recent of these. Harsh treatment of detainees, "extraordinary renditions," secret foreign prisons, and the newly minted enemy combatant designation have also undermined our values. The resulting policies have harmed counterterrorism efforts and produced few tangible results.
With a partisan Congress predictably reluctant to censure a politically aligned president, it is all the more important for citizens themselves to demand disclosure, oversight, and restraint of sweeping claims of executive power. This book is the first step.
Customer Reviews:
Love the PW review- as always.......2007-07-10
I'm so glad we have the reader reviews on Amazon. The Publishers Weekly evaluations are often very biased and dismissive. "Though another book criticizing the Bush presidency is of questionable necessity" - really? We've reached the limit on books examining and critiquing the performance of the President of the United States? Thanks, PW! I'll stop worrying about the health of our democracy and go straight to bed.
"A Republic, If You Can Keep It".......2007-07-09
Benjamin Franklin, when asked what type of government we had created, is said to have replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." "Unchecked and Unbalanced" shows why America is in danger of being transformed into a monarchy by the Bush Administration, reporting how this new theory of unchecked presidential power developed and why it is wrong. The authors also contend that the theory is not a response to 9/11, but long nurtured by Cheney and his assistant David Addington from at least the days of the Iran-Contra investigation, and even followed (to a much lesser extent) by Bill Clinton.
Executive branch lawyers now describe an ongoing (not just emergency) power to set aside legal checks imposed by Congress and to even act when Congress is silent. This authority extends to treaties as well, and at least one Office of Legal Council (OLC) leader claims coverage of judicial decisions as well.
Lincoln acted early on at the start of the Civil war without Congressional authorization, and even ignored an order by the Chief Justice. The difference between Lincoln and Bush is that Lincoln did not do so on an on-going basis, sought subsequent approval, and did not act in secret.
"Unchecked and Unbalanced" provides rationale for concluding that OLC's conclusions are wrong; it also asserts that the OLC claims were developed without adherence to professional obligations - eg. they failed to identify, let alone respond to, weaknesses in their legal arguments, and failed to mention key Supreme Court cases.
Finally, to protect our republic, the authors recommend Congress hold hearings and act, and that the Supreme Court follow suit. Unfortunately this is made difficult by executive branch supervision of intelligence gathering and distribution.
Very dangerous premise.......2007-07-06
propounded here. For background, Schwarz was counsel for the Church Committee. It was that committee that emasculated the CIA, not allowing it to deal with foreign agents with any sort of criminal record (who does the spying; not the Boy Scouts) and putting up barriers for communications between U.S. intelligence agencies. All this lead directly to many of the problems of 9/11. Now, because of their hatred for Bush, these authors want to return to that Alice in Wonderland approach to national security. That's why this premise is so dangerous; our lives depend on it.
Responsibly Written - Well Researched.......2007-05-24
The authors documents how the Bush Administration, in an effort to fight terrorism, has side-stepped the constitution, circumvented the Geneva Convention, and broken countless other laws. The authors describe how the net result is an erosion of the moral character of America, which, in the long run, is counterproductive in the war on terror.
The right people to ring the alarm bells.......2007-05-07
Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr. is senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and a partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. He was chief counsel to the Church Committee. Aziz Z. Huq is associate counsel at the Brennan Center and previously clerked for the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a book you will not be able to put down, in which they demonstrate and document how the Bush administration has gone further than Nixon or Reagan ever dreamed to create a monarchical presidency with the acquiescence of a complicit Congress and a cowed judiciary.
Book Description
This is a story of ever-expanding presidential powers in an age of unwinnable wars. Harry Truman and Korea, Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam, George W. Bush and Iraq: three presidents, three ever broader interpretations of the commander in chief clause of the Constitution, three unwinnable wars, and three presidential secrets. Award-winning presidential biographer and military historian Geoffrey Perret places these men and events in the larger context of the post-World War II world to establish their collective legacy: a presidency so powerful it undermines the checks and balances built into the Constitution, thereby creating a permanent threat to the Constitution itself.
In choosing to fight in Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq, Truman, Johnson, and Bush alike took counsel of their fears, ignored the advice of the professional military and major allies, and were influenced by facts kept from public view. Convinced that an ever-more powerful commander in chief was the key to victory, they misread the moment. Since World War II wars have become tests of stamina rather than strength, and more likely than not they sow the seeds of future wars. Yet recent American presidents have chosen to place their country in the forefront of fighting them. In the course of doing so, however, they gave away the secret of American power—for all its might, the United States can be defeated by chaos and anarchy.
Customer Reviews:
Red Hot Anger Harms Strength of Message.......2007-06-16
I've just about finished a very uneven diatribe against American presidential power called "Commander-in-Chief," by Geoffrey Perret, an historian who wrote a good bio of U. S. Grant about 10 years ago. The basic premise of the new book is that Truman, Johnson, and Bush Two extended presidential power in unconstitutional ways to pursue wrongheaded wars, and they had help from Nixon, Reagan, Clinton and Bush One. JFK, Ford, and Carter get somewhat of a pass, but not JFK's advisors, and certainly not his generals.
Much of Perret's prose is so vitrolic and sarcastic that it takes away from the strength of the arguments he's trying to put forward. His footnoting of his research is also uneven; a claim that a Kuwaiti diplomat's daughter gave perjured testimony to the U.S. Congress about butchered babies in the Iraqi attack on Kuwait, and that this testimony helped persuade Congress to vote for war powers to attack Iraq in Gulf One, is unsupported by any footnotes. The hell of it is that he's basically on the money in his assessments.
I'm too old and fixed in habit to stop reading and listening to historical and political pundits, but I would solemnly advise you not to bother to do so, and just simply vote against any politician (such as Rudi Giuliani) who suggests that going to war is going to solve our problems. As Perret points out, the U.S. must reassess the limits of its power, find alernative energy sources other than in the Mideast, and stop parading around as the toughest guy on the block. Otherwise, the chaos and anarchy created by our unwise actions will ultimately combine to make us defeat ourselves.
Excellent book.......2007-05-29
Perret does a fine job of showing how the war powers of congress have been gradually eroded to the point where the president may take the country to war at whim and not be held accountable. He shows how the trend actually began with Truman and continued with a the series of our "smaller" wars. Overall, a very good analysis. No one else has summed up this material quite as well.
Brillant or Left Wing Propanganda ?.......2007-03-31
If you believe that the result of the Korean,Vietnam and current war in Iraq have permanetly harmed this nation and benfitted China then this book is for you. Perret trace the origins of the cold war and although condems Stalin's brutalty chareterizes the reponse of the Soviet Union and Mao as reasonable.
Perret traces the cold war to Gerald Ford and manages to only praise Kennedy's handing. He calls Nixon a mad man but the sub title doesn't mention him. He barely mentions Carter or Reagen which is suprising considering how even liberal historians give Reagen some credit for ending the cold war.
The last one third of the book descends into an anti Bush diatribe. Any pretension about being an even handed historian from a liberal bent are disgarded and every emotional /charge is made agaisnt GW Bush from calling him an action figure to a draft dodger drug user.He details Bush's alleged evil deeds such as signing statemnts. There appears to be factual errors in this part of the book but to detail them is beyond my responsibilty (much like the writer's I suppose). Perret inadvertedly makes Bush's arguments that the jihadists will follow us back to the US. Isn't it the Republican argument that it is better to fight them in Bagdad than in the streets of New York ?
It is said that those who do not learn the mistakes of the past are doomed to relieve them. However Perret stands this on its end by weaving history to fit his conclusions about the present.
I gave this three stars for the insignt one gets from the first half of the book but the second part should have been written twenty years form now when emotions cool .
Book Description
In his address to the nation on September 20, 2001, President Bush declared war on terrorism and set in motion a detention policy unlike any we have ever seen. Since then, the United States has seized thousands of people from around the globe, setting off a firestorm of controversy. Guantanamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power explores that policy and the intense debates that have followed.
Written by an expert on the subject, one of the lawyers who fought -- and won -- the right for prisoners to have judicial review, this important book will be of immense interest to liberals and conservatives alike. With shocking facts and firsthand accounts, Margulies takes readers deep into the Guantánamo Bay prison, into the interrogation rooms and secret cells where hundreds of men and boys have been designated "enemy combatants." Held without legal process, they have been consigned to live out their days in isolation until the Bush administration sees fit to release them -- if itever does. Margulies warns Americans to be especially concerned by the administration's assertion that the Presidentcan have unlimited and unchecked legal authority.
Tracing the arguments on both sides of the debate, this vitally important book paints a portrait of a country divided, on the brink of ethical collapse, where the loss of personal freedoms is under greater threat than ever before.
Customer Reviews:
The lies of a biased attorney.......2007-10-13
After witnessing what goes on in Guantanamo Bay for a year and being a guard that had great report with the subject in question in this book I found the book quite humorous. There were multiple instances of bending the truth and even quite a bold faced lies.
A powerful and important book.......2007-08-29
This book deserves a much wider audience. No matter how bad you think things are in Guantanamo, this book makes clear that the reality is ten times worse. Margulies is extremely knowledgeable about the issues, and he's a fine writer. It is hard not to feel ashamed -- and outraged -- by the injustices that are occurring under our flag. Let me add that I do not know (and have never met) the author, Joseph Margulies.
Extremely well-written, intelligent arguments........2007-07-12
One of the few books I've read about any controversial topic that resists the temptation to start name-calling, insult-slinging and obvious political agendas.
Dr. Margulies succeeds in explaining legal arguments in a way that is engaging and not condescending. He addresses every question you could have about torture and then some. He does something many authors fail to do: he argues his point in a greater context than the argument itself. That is to say, anyone can argue torture in the context of laws or the Geneva Convetions. Dr. Margulies goes further and discusses torture in the context of security for civilians and soldiers and foriegn policy, and then also provides the background for the writing of the Geneva Conventions and why we have refrained from torture in the past.
Absolutely enlightening.
Makes You Wonder Why Bush Is Not In Prison.......2007-01-05
Robert McNamara noted (about WWII), "LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he's right. He... and I'd say I... were behaving as war criminals." No question that the only thing that keeps Bush, Rumsfeldt, etc. out of jail is that fact that they are protected by our country's hard to challenge power. If we were a broken power rather than a great power, it seems certain that someone would try to lock them up.
This book confirms that many laws, national and international, regarding torture, detention, and so on have been willfully violated. It is a compelling and disturbing story. And the final chapters are still to be written.
Human right & Guantanamo.......2006-11-02
This is good research book written by a powerful human right lawyer professor who gave a first hand litigation on behalf of the detainees deemed titled as enemy combatants who lost the dignity and qualification of being human.
He argued with precedents that during war time, enemy combatants had their rights and were subject to Geneva Convention protection. In Guantanamo Bay detention center, he documented that detainees were subject to interrogative techniques being abusive, illegal and immoral. He questioned such reign of terror method to get information to protect Americans are doubtful.
He showed that many of the detainees were the unlikely ones at the wrong time at the wrong place being rounded and ended up at Camp Delta. The torture on these 'suspects' may make a sharp contrast to American Constitution of all men are created equal, due process, human rights and rule of laws. Why it happened in the country with such high moral ground? Do we hear the born-again call for turning the other cheek?
This book will answer why the President justify the camp and technique for protecting the American people.
Book Description
A classic and bestselling work by one of our top Constitutional scholars, Presidential War Power garnered the lead review in the New York Times Book Review and raised essential issues that have only become more timely, relevant, and controversial since its initial publication nearly a decade ago.
In this new edition, Louis Fisher updates his arguments throughout, critiques the presidential actions of William Clinton and George W. Bush, and challenges their dangerous expansion of executive power. Spanning the life of the Republic from the Revolutionary Era to the nation's post-9/11 wars, the new edition now covers:
€ New military initiatives including the Use of Force Act, the Iraq Resolution of 2002, George W. Bush's new "preemption doctrine," and his order authorizing military tribunals.
€ President Clinton's overt and covert military actions in Bosnia and against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden.
€ George H. W. Bush's reasons for not pushing on to Baghdad to overthrow Saddham Hussein after DESERT STORM.
€ Numerous Congressional initiatives, including a 1995 effort to amend the War Powers Resolution and a proposed 1998 amendment to use the power of the purse to limit presidential military initiatives.
€ The 1998 CIA "whistle-blowing" statute.
€ New sections on the Vandenberg Resolution of 1948, the "Little Sarah" incident of 1793, and early apparent precedents that did not make the President the "sole organ" of foreign affairs.
€ New material on letters of marque and reprisal, the law of nations, presidential "fame," and the contributions of Joseph Story.
Customer Reviews:
Powerful indictment of the modern abuse of the war power.......2006-01-17
Fisher's book is the strongest demonstration of how far we have allowed the original constitutional design of the war power to be destroyed that I've seen so far. Originally the war power was designed to avoid allowing a single person (i.e. the President) to decide whether we go to war; that was the duty of Congress. Fisher documents this fact and then examines two hundred years of American armed conflicts. Until the early 20th Century, with only minor deviations, it was understood that the President had to get authorization from Congress before entering armed conflicts. Only after WWII did the President claim the sole power to go to war, with Congress simply along for the ride. Fisher is nonpartisan in his criticism, attacking every President from Truman to Bush II, though he is supportive of Eisenhower's limited return to Congressional consultation. Fisher explains how practically every military action taking in this period was unconstitutional.
What I like most about this book is the fact that Fisher, unlike many other critics of this problem, does not seek to push the Supreme Court to intervene and restrain the President. Instead, he places the burden upon Congress. Fisher examines attempts to constrain presidential power, such as the War Powers Act, and illustrates that each has been insufficient and offers proposed changes to improve these checks. An interesting and informative read and we can only hope that someday Congress will again take up its responsibility rather than hide behind the President and then blame him if things go badly.
Congress' Critic.......2001-09-18
Although some background in constitutional law may be helpful, this book is very readable. Fisher is a thorough scholar, but he is also honest in giving vent to his frustration with Congress' cessation of war power in the modern evolution of Executive-Legislative relations.
This book is a great resource for historical and anecdotal information on the constitutional balance of power between the President and the Congress. Well-cited, and with a firm basis in constitutional logic and theory, Fisher develops a clear case that -although it does take on a diatribal flavor at times- does not require academic contortions to be demonstrated.
The criticism of the War Powers Act is very powerful, and needs to be understood more broadly in America. The unconstitutionality of the act is one reason it is never seriously invoked by the President or insisted upon by Congress, yet many people still refer to it as the crux for understanding the war powers balance between the Presidency and the Congress.
An excellent book for anyone interested in Constitutional allocation of power; useful for students, professors, and the concerned citizen.
Congress Good, President Bad.......2001-01-13
Constitutional scholar Louis Fisher has done a magnificent job capturing the history of what he calls "presidential warmaking" -- that is, the tendency of presidents to usurp Congress's Constitutional war-making power. Fisher is not persuaded by claims advanced by modern presidents -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- that the Commander-in-Chief clause grants them broad discretionary war-making powers. His book is a long legal brief in favor of returning the war powers to the Congress.
At times, Fisher's belief in the rightness of his cause borders on the polemic. Though he recognizes that Congress has been complicit in presidential war-making, he reserves his harshest criticism for the presidents themselves. Arguably, however, it takes two to tango; if Congress actually *wanted* the war powers, it could take them "back." But as research shows, it is easier -- and therefore more palatable -- to sit on the sidelines, sniping at the president in case of failure or claiming a share of the credit after success.
No student of American politics or American foreign policy can plausibly claim to discuss the role of the executive branch in military/foreign policy without having digested Fisher's book.
Book Description
In wartime, presidents are always tempted to expand their authority. But in doing so, they often reach beyond their constitutional mandate.
Although the use of military tribunals can be necessary and even effective in times of war, Louis Fisher contends that these courts present a grave danger to open government and the separation of powers. Citing the constitutional provision vesting Congress with the authority to create tribunals, Fisher addresses the threats posed by the dramatic expansion of presidential power in time of war-and the meek efforts of Congress and the judiciary to curb it.
Military Tribunals and Presidential Power is the only book to offer detailed and comprehensive coverage of these extra-legal courts, taking in the sweep of American history from colonial times to today's headlines. Focusing on those periods when the Constitution and civil liberties have been most severely tested by threats to national security, Fisher critiques tribunals called during the presidencies of Washington, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Truman. He also examines other presidential actions that present military justifications to augment political power, such as suspending the writ of habeas corpus, invoking martial law, and using courts-martial to try U.S. citizens.
Fisher also analyzes how the Bush administration relied heavily on precedents set in World War II-notably the Supreme Court's opinion regarding Nazi saboteurs, Ex parte Quirin, a case shown in recent times to have been a rush to judgment. He scrutinizes the much-publicized cases of John Walker Lindh, Yaser Esam Hamdi, Jose Padilla, Zacarias Moussaoui, and the Guantanamo detainees to reveal how the executive branch has gone far beyond the bounds of even Quirin, and he suggests that it is short-sighted to believe that what was only tolerable half a century ago should be accepted as a given today.
Fisher's book cuts to the bone of current controversies and sounds an alarm for maintaining the checks and balances we value as a nation.
Customer Reviews:
important.......2005-10-06
You may have heard of military courts-martial, which in U.S. practice have evolved into something parallel to other U.S. courts, with independent judges and defense counsel, rules of evidence and procedure, military courts of appeal, and rooted in case law and applicable Constitutional law. The tribunals -- "military commissions" -- were different: an extraordinary and special proceeding with none of those guarantees, and, until 9/11, a freak wartime event last seen in WWII (Mr. Fisher's recent and excellent "Nazi Saboteurs on Trial" addresses one such case). Now the Bush Administration has revived the military commissions and this book is a timely (mid-2005) re-telling of the history and practice of these tribunals. I've written and researched on this topic and find Mr. Fisher's book is possibly the best single volume on the subject. His prose is clear to the layperson, he is brilliant in putting the tribunals in context, and is quick to find parallels in the detention (WWII + post-9/11) case law.
(Postscript: the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, June 29, 2006, was directly on point to military commissions and Presidential powers. The book is still very worth reading in light of possible attempts in Congress to address the issue.)
Customer Reviews:
It IS a page-turner.......2006-11-27
It's a hoot to read and as much at home on the beach as in the classroom. Sounds like the one fellow who slammed it in another review here just didn't want to take the course in which it was required reading. (I am very conscious of writing skill and have used Amazon to diss a number of extremely well researched books because they poorly written. Sacred cows I do not recognize.) Remini takes what should be a deadly dull topic - banking - and turns it into a drama (and comedy) describing the clash between two bone-headed men: Pres. Andrew Jackson and Bank of the United States president, Nicolas Biddle. That clash changed the United States forever. Highly recommended.
A gem of a book.......2002-10-08
After reading Bray Hammond's "Banks and Politics in America" and his trenchant critique of the Jacksonian assault on the Second Bank of the United States (BUS), I was interested to learn how Robert Remini, a historian known for his pro-Jackson tilt, responded to that attack on the Old Hero.
The answer is: he responded with a crisp, cogent and remarkably fair and insightful history of the struggle over the BUS.
The BUS had a profound political, economic, and social impact on American life during its short life (1816-1836). In his book, however, Remini seeks to address just one side of the controversy: the political. He concedes that there was much good in the BUS from a strictly economic perspective and destroying it without a concrete plan to replace the monetary institution undoubtedly did harm to the American economy as a whole. But, Remini argues, it was the political implications of the War - not the Panic of 1837 or the subsequent failure to adopt central banking in the US for nearly a century - that had the more far-reaching consequences.
It has been argued that Jackson was the first modern president. It is undeniable that the power of the presidency took a giant leap forward during Jackson's two-terms and Remini shows that those monumental gains in power came mostly during and because of the Bank War.
In particular, Remini argues that the Bank War is directly responsible for three areas of enhanced presidential power: 1) the use of the veto to reject legislation for purely political rather than constitutional reasons, thus inserting the president into the legislative process and, in effect, making his opinion count for two-thirds of both Houses of Congress; 2) even though Remini believes that the majority of Americans didn't support the president's stance on the BUS, Jackson made the election of 1832 a referendum on the bank issue and claimed henceforth that he represented the will of the people and was there one representative; and 3) Jackson's sacking of Secretary of the Treasury Duane for his refusal to remove the government deposits from the BUS exerted the president's right to remove Cabinet members at will, further strengthening the executive's grip over the government.
In short, there is stunning agreement between Remini and Hammond on a number of issues. For instance, Remini concedes that Jackson's veto of the BUS re-charter in July 1832 was pure demagogic class baiting with indefensible charges against the BUS's operations. He also rejects the notion that Jackson's re-election was a popular show of support for his attack on the BUS and he credits Nicolas Biddle with running an efficient, although by no means perfect, central banking organization. Thus, on economic grounds, Remini really sides with Hammond. But, Remini maintains, the economics of the issue was a distant second to the politics of issue. The cause of the War was political - namely, Jackson's refusal to bend or even appear to bend to a political challenge - and the most significant results of the War were political. Remini's case is sound.
Lacking.......2001-10-11
This has to be one of the most boring books I have ever read in my life, therefore making it a waste of my time to read it. I would not have bought the book unless if I wouldn't have had to write an essay on it for my History 1050 class. I do not recommend this book for casual reading, in fact, I do not recommend this book at all. However, if you are involved in History as a profession, or if you are excited by History, then this is a book for you. It provides tons of information, but to me it is all irrelevant. If you are a college student with many other things to do like myself, I will personally tell you right now to leave this book on the shelf.
Review.......2000-06-15
Remini's book, Andrew Jackson and the Bank War, is a very good book in the way of information. Although it is not a "page turner," it satisfies in giving the information. I would not have purchased this book except it is needed for my American History course.
Average customer rating:
|
What Limits Should Be Placed on Presidential Powers? (At Issue Series)
Manufacturer: Greenhaven Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Teens
| Subjects
| Books
| Audiobooks
| Authors, A-Z
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Health, Mind & Body
| History & Historical Fiction
| Horror
| Literature & Fiction
| Manga
| Mysteries
| Reference
| Religion & Spirituality
| School & Sports
| Science & Technology
| Science Fiction & Fantasy
| Series
| Social Issues
General
| Social Science
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Politics & Government
| Reference & Nonfiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Terrorism
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0737736305 |
Average customer rating:
|
War and Presidential Power: A Chronicle of Congressional Surrender
Thomas F. Eagleton
Manufacturer: W W Norton & Co Inc
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
State & Local Government
| Government
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Federal Government
| Government
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
U.S.
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Local Government
| Levels of Government
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Federal Jurisdiction
| Administrative Law
| Law
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0871405814 |
Book Description
Government seizure of the nation’s strikebound steel mills on 8 April 1952 stands as one of President Harry S Truman’s most controversial actions, representing an unprecedented use of presidential power. On 8 June 1952 the United States Supreme Court invalidated Truman’s order with its monumental decision in Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer. The history and significance of this case constitute the subject of Maeva Marcus’s meticulously researched, brilliantly analyzed, and authoritative study. From Truman’s initial assertion of "inherent" executive power under the Constitution to the High Court’s seven opinions, Marcus assesses the influence of the case on the doctrine of separation of powers and, specifically, the nature and practice of executive authority. First published in 1977 (Columbia University Press), and reissued here in paperback with a new foreword by Louis Fisher, this book remains the definitive account of the Steel Seizure incident and its political and legal ramifications.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent Recycled Dissertation.......2005-06-18
This excellent book is a history of Youngstown v. Sawyer, a landmark Supreme Court case on Presidential powers. The case arose during the Korean War, when the White House nationalized steel factories to block a strike that threatened to disrupt steel production. The Supreme Court firmly rejected Truman's claim of an "inherent" Presidential power to seize private property during wartime. Given the extremist constitutional claims made by the current Bush Administration -- including the power to hold American citizens incommunicado for the duration of the (potentially endless) war on terror -- Youngstown remains hugely relevant today.
Marcus lays out the political, legal, and foreign policy contexts of Youngstown before delving into the details of the litigation and discussing the constitutional significance of the outcome. Her exposition is workmanlike and methodical, as befits a recycled doctoral dissertation. My only real complaint -- hence the rating of four stars -- is that long sections of the book are little more than summaries of legal briefs and courtroom oral arguments. These could have been cut back. But with that qualification, I would recommend the book without reservation to anyone interested in American constitutional history or the institution of the Presidency.
Parallels to our time?.......2004-08-30
In an earlier era, steel making was a key strategic industry for the US. Marcus takes us back to 1952 and the tensions of that era. With World War 2 still recently over and the Korean conflict starting up, the international situation looked grave. She walks us through the events that led Truman to take over the steel mills. She marshalls the arguments pro and con for this, that echoed through the nation.
A very readable study in the limitations of presidential power. Plus a current reader might be struck by the parallels between Truman's actions and Bush's recent decisions. Both presidents asserted prerogatives that were strenuously opposed by others. Though in retrospect, the Cold War and the then developing Korean War were far deadlier for the US than the current situation, where the US has a unipolar hyperpower advantage.
Book Description
In examining the influence of historical analogies on decisions to use--or not use--force, military strategist Jeffrey Record assesses every major application of U.S. force from the Korean War to the NATO war on Serbia. Specifically, he looks at the influence of two analogies: the democracies? appeasement of Hitler at Munich and America's defeat in the Vietnam War. His book judges the utility of these two analogies on presidential decision-making and finds considerable misuse of them in situations where force was optional. He points to the Johnson administration's application of the Munich analogy to the circumstances of Southeast Asia in 1965 as the most egregious example of their misuse, but also cites the faulty reasoning by historical analogy that prevailed among critics of Reagan's policy in Central America and in Clinton's use of force in Haiti and the former Yugoslavia.
The author's findings show generational experience to be a key influence on presidential decision-making: Munich persuaded mid-twentieth-century presidents that force should be used early and decisively while Vietnam cautioned later presidents against using force at all. Both analogies were at work for the Gulf War, with Munich urging a decision for war and Vietnam warning against a graduated and highly restricted use of force. Record also reminds us of the times when presidents have used analogies to mobilize public support for action they have already decided to take. Addressing both the process of presidential decision-making and the wisdom of decisions made, this well-reasoned book offers timely lessons to a broad audience that includes political scientists, military historians, defense analysts, and policy makers, as well as those simply curious about history's influence.
Customer Reviews:
Very important read for leaders and citizens alike.......2003-04-04
I don't know if Jeffrey Record had the then-impending, now underway, war against Iraq in mind when he wrote this important book, but I don't think he could have made this any more timely if he had. From politicians to talk radio, the metaphors of "appeasement" and "avoiding another Vietnam" loom large in the debate over Iraq. I would suggest that this title be made required reading for anyone who dares send those metaphors into battle.
Record argues that Munich and Vietnam have been the dominant historical memes in White Houses deciding whether or not to employ American power around the world. For better or worse, what various Presidents and their advisors have taken to be "the lessons of Munich" and/or "the lessons of Vietnam" have been important, sometimes deciding, factors. Not surprisingly, Record finds that those "lessons" have often been misinterpreted and mis-applied by our political leaders, many times with serious consequences.
While this book is especially useful for anyone in, or who fancies themselves someday being in, a position of political influence, Record's work is also valuable reading for the rest of us. That's because he also analyzes how those same historical memes have been used by Presidents and their spokesmen to justify particular courses of action to the American people. It's important that we be able to recognize when that's being done, and equipped to decide whether the metaphor is valid. This title is a very useful tool in that process.
Duff Cooper, a British politician and contemporary of Winston Churchill, once wrote that one of the problems with democracy is that too few democratic leaders read history. The corollary of that, Record might argue, is that even the ones who have read history are apt to misinterpret it, or color their interpretations to justify actions they have already decided are desirable. An attractive metaphor can exert powerful force on decision-makers. Few things are more seductive ... or potentially more dangerous. Jeffrey Record is to be commended for helping the reader see though the seductiveness and apply the cold light of logical thought.
Books:
- Understanding By Design
- Victory on the Potomac: The Goldwater-Nichols Act Unifies the Pentagon (Texas a & M University Military History Series)
- War As I Knew It
- War As I Knew It
- War Story: The Classic True Story of the First Generation of Green Berets
- Way of the Peaceful Warrior: A Book That Changes Lives
- We Shall Not Sleep: A Novel (World War I)
- West from Appomattox: The Reconstruction of America after the Civil War
- A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature
- A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide
- Every Heart Restored: A Wife's Guide to Healing in the Wake of a Husband's Sexual Sin
- Today's Country Houses
- A Concise History of American Architecture
- Biochemistry & Molecular Biology of Plants
- History: Fiction or Science
- Cotton Comes to Harlem
- Trompe L'Oeil Panels and Panoramas: Decorative Images for Artists and Architects
- Zaha Hadid: The Complete Work
- More Gene Manipulations in Fungi
The Matador's Cape: America's Reckless Response to Terror
Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy
The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration
Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA
Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower
