Vol. 3 No. 4 (April, 1993) pp. 41-42
THE OXFORD COMPANION TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES by
Kermit L. Hall (ed.). New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
1032 pp. Cloth $49.95.
Reviewed by Herbert Jacob (Northwestern University)
THE OXFORD COMPANION is evidently intended as a reference work
for students, journalists and other interested readers who wish
to learn quickly about one or another aspect of the United States
Supreme Court. It is edited by three legal historians (Kermit L.
Hall, James W. Ely, and William W. Wiecek) and one political
scientist (Joel B. Grossman). It is arranged alphabet- ically by
topic with signed articles by 296 (by my count) schol- ars. Some
of the articles are several pages long; many occupy a column or
less. A large number of the contributors are political
scientists.
THE OXFORD COMPANION is remarkably comprehensive if one
approaches the subject from a legalistic perspective. Readers
will find short biographies of all Supreme Court justices. The
majority of articles are brief summaries of important cases from
ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT V. SCHEMP to ZURCHER V. THE STANFORD
DAILY. There are also articles on issues such as abortion (by
Judith Baer), judicial review (by John Brigham), capital punish-
ment (by Lief Carter), speedy trial (by Malcolm Feeley). Some of
articles are quite substantial such as the four pieces on the
history of the Court which cover 32 pages. Most are brief,
encompassing less than a page. Doctrines are identified and
discussed as for example, the Preferred Freedoms Doctrine (by C.
Herman Pritchett), Exhaustion of Remedies (by Michael F.
Sturley), and the Right to Counsel (by Susette M. Talarico).
Broad concepts such as capitalism as well as topics such as the
New Deal merit a lengthy articles. Important statutes are
described separately in brief pieces. There are even articles on
the architecture of the Supreme Court building, on Supreme Court
buildings, on paintings in the Supreme Court, and on the sculp-
ture in the building.
Thus, THE OXFORD COMPANION is an attractive source to which to
send students for an introductory understanding of particular
aspects of the Supreme Court as an institution, of its proce-
dures, of its decisions, and of its personnel. However, it
suffers from several weaknesses that trouble this reviewer.
One fault is that THE OXFORD COMPANION's references to addi-
tional sources are spotty at best. Some articles cite several
sources (though rarely more than a handful); many offer none at
all. For instance, Lief Carter's article (approximately one page)
on capital punishment mentions only Hugo Adam Bedau's THE DEATH
PENALTY IN AMERICA (1987) and Errol Morris' film, "The Thin
Blue Line" (1987). The articles by Lawrence Baum on
reversals of Supreme Court decisions by constitutional amendment
and by Congressional legislation have none at all. I presume that
this was an editorial decision, but I judge it to be a bad one.
Such skimpy references will not provide much assistance to
students who are embarking on a term paper project. It encourages
stu- dents to take the articles in the COMPANION as the last word
on the subject.
My second concern is that THE OXFORD COMPANION reflects little of
the political science research that has occurred over the past
half century. James Gibson's article on public opinion is one of
the rare articles which are attentive to social science findings
about the Court. Most striking is the absence of a focused
discussion of interest groups and the Court even though many of
the contributors to this body of knowledge write other articles
in the COMPANION. Thus Stephen L. Wasby writes an article of less
than a page on amicus briefs. Individual inter- est groups may be
found such as the American Civil Liberties Union (in an article
by Samuel Walker) and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (in brief
articles by Mark V. Tushnet and Eric Rise) but students would
have to know where to look and will not find much mention of the
interest
Page 42 follows:
group literature. Of the ten articles that Harold J. Spaeth
contributes, the closest he (or any other contributor) gets to
scaling or judicial attitudes is his article on Justice Scalia.
There is no article on voting blocs or the analysis of voting
patterns although C. Herman Pritchett contributes eleven articles
on individual cases. Stephen Wasby's one-column article on
decision-making dynamics (p. 222) has no references. The impact
of decisions (also written by Wasby) merits two columns but also
has no references (pp. 422-23). The extraordinary influence of
the Solicitor General in setting the Court's agenda is mentioned
by Lincoln Caplan, but that influence is buried in much trivia
about the SG's office. Thus, he contends that "special rela-
tionship" between the SG and the Court is illustrated by the
custom that when a justice dies, "the Solicitor General is
asked to call a meeting of the Supreme Court bar to honor the
justice." (p. 803)
THE OXFORD COMPANION will prove puzzling to students whose
courses introduce them to political analyses of the Court. The
concepts which they learn in those courses are not readily found
in this book. Although many political scientists contributed to
it, readers will have difficulty ascertaining the discipline's
contribution to our understanding of the Court. Is it really as
small as this volume suggests?
Finally, this reviewer is left to wonder why THE OXFORD COMPANION
was not published on a CD-ROM. An electronic medium would make
THE OXFORD COMPANION far simpler to search and incom- parably
easier to update. This is a book destined for library reference
rooms where CD-ROMs are now commonly found. I hope the publisher
considers such a medium in the near future.
Copyright 1993