Armed with data and passion, constitutional policy analyst Ian Millhiser dissects the annals of the U.S. Supreme Court to make the argument that the unelected arm of the federal government has historically favored the interests of conservative politics and big business over the welfare of individuals. From early workers and civil rights cases to modern health care and campaign finance disputes, Millhiser's Injustices scrutinizes decisions that have shaped the American landscape.
Civics classes teach that the Supreme Court ensures the constitutional rights of all Americans, and that the justices perform their duties with a nonpartisan perspective. But evidence doesn't support this. Millhiser cites cases such as Lochner v. New York, which in 1905 struck down workers' rights in favor of employers' rights to create unrestricted contracts, and Buck v. Bell, issued in 1927, which ruled that a woman could be sterilized because she was an imbecile, and therefore should not perpetuate her bloodline. Through precedent, definition, anecdotal and other supporting evidence, Millhiser shows how such decisions are unsubstantiated, often driven by personal bias, not constitutional mandate.
Furthermore, Millhiser demonstrates that some decisions in favor of individuals, like upholding the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (until the Court's 2013 reversal of a key part of the Act), have improved the nation for as long as they remain law. He also praises the Warren Court, "a brief period when the Supreme Court read the Constitution and saw some of the many ways it was intended to make American lives better."
Injustices is an eye-opening look at the Court. Accessible to readers with little legal background, this is a powerful study of the branch of American government most often left unchecked. --Jen Forbus of Jen's Book Thoughts