Vol. 2, No. 10 (October, 1992) pp. 165-166

AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW by Robert J. Steamer and Richard J. Maiman. New York: McGraw Hill 1992. 562 pp. Paper $38.50.

Reviewed by John Gilliom, Department of Political Science, Ohio University

Arguing that there are a growing number of one semester constitutional law classes that are ill served by the traditional large and expensive text, Steamer and Maiman have attempted to meet the resulting need with a "short case law book" that is both "comprehensive and economical." Despite the short format, the authors still cover a wide breadth of material: historically important cases, the institutional dynamics of the court, and competing theories and concepts of law and judicial review. Their obvious danger is that the omission and brevity required for such a limited amount of space will leave students only briefly acquainted with, and potentially confused about, key concepts and issues in the field.

The book is organized into seven chapters. The first provides an introductory discussion of law, the Constitution, and the structure and role of the judiciary in American politics. The chapter concludes with four cases intended to illustrate the court's policymaking role: GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT, NEW YORK TIMES V. U.S., FURMAN V. GEORGIA, AND ROE V. WADE. Here and throughout the book, each case is set up with an able and interesting introduction. The cases have gone through fairly extensive editing to fit the abbreviated format, but still do a good job of conveying the gist of the decision. Following each case is a helpful "aftermath" section, which describes the fate of the individuals and issues involved in the case. In the book as a whole, chapters and cases within chapters are organized in a largely ahistorical format which will frustrate teachers who attempt to portray the development of the court over time.

Judicial review is covered in the second chapter. Here, the authors provide an enlightening and more widely needed discussion that clarifies the relationship between activist and restrained jurists, on the one hand, and liberal and conservative ones, on the other. While contemporary students tend to believe that liberals are activists and conservatives are restrained, Steamer and Maiman clearly show that there are both restrained liberals and active conservatives. Unfortunately the discussion stops short of the contemporary Supreme Court, which is probably what students most need and want to talk about. The cases of this chapter include MARBURY V. MADISON, FLETCHER V. PECK, DRED SCOTT, HOME BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION V. BLAISDELL, HEART OF ATLANTA MOTEL V. U.S., and others which demonstrate the issues involved in the politics of judicial review. BR>
Chapter 3 takes on the structural issues of federalism and the separation of powers. After a brief seven page discussion, the chapter turns to a long review of case law ranging from MCCULLOUGH V. MARYLAND through U.S. V. NIXON. As will befit many political scientists' approach to constitutional law, this is by far the longest chapter in the book. Under "Due Process of Law" (ch. 4), Steamer and Maiman provide a brief but effective discussion of the concept of due process, competing theories of incorporation, and the differences between procedural and substantive due process. The discussion is illustrated with THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE CASES, PALKO V. CONNECTICUT, MAPP V. OHIO, LOCHNER V. NEW YORK, GRISWOLD V. CONNECTICUT, BOWERS V. HARDWICK, AND CRUZAN V. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. Economic substantive due process needs more detailed explanation and analysis; NEBBIA V. NEW YORK and FERGUSON V. SKRUPA would be helpful additions.

The final three chapters cover freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and equal protection. Chapter 5 has an excellent selection of cases to demonstrate the issues and concepts involved in the freedom of expression debate: SCHENCK V. U.S., DENNIS V. U.S., BRANDENBURG V. OHIO, NEAR V. MINNESOTA, EDWARDS V. SOUTH CAROLINA, TEXAS V. JOHNSON, NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN, HUSTLER MAGAZINE V. FALWELL, BRANZBURG V. HAYES, MILLER V. CALIFORNIA, AND COHEN V. CALIFORNIA. Similarly, Chapter 6 provides what might be called the "greatest hits album" of religion cases.

The final chapter attempts to cover equal protection of the law and is a disappointment in the wake of the preceding First Amendment chapters. With just six cases on race and two on gender, the chapter gives only a hint of the many issues, controversies, and critical disputes at work in this area. While the cases selected are certainly crucial -- BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION, SWANN V. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBERG, MILLIKEN V. BRADLEY, SHELLEY V. KRAEMER, BOARD OF REGENTS V. BAKKE, METRO BROADCASTING V. FCC, REED V. REED, FRONTIERO V. RICHARDSON, AND REYNOLDS V. SIMS -- more is needed in both case law, explanation, and critical analysis.

Throughout this review, the most frequently used words are variations on the word "brief." To provide such a short text, the authors are aware that they have had to leave a lot out and abbreviate all that remains. Let me first touch upon what is left out and then turn to what is abbreviated.

Steamer and Maiman state that their "most difficult task was to decide...what to leave out" (p. xiv) and I think that it must have been a daunting chore. Given the importance and difficulty of the decisions about what to include and what to omit, it is surprising that the book contains no discussion of the logic of organization or topic choice. Naturally, individual tastes and preferences are likely to differ widely as to what material is "essential" to the field and should be included in a book such as this. My students, for example, have been especially fascinated with Fourth Amendment law and it was surprising to see virtually no discussion in this area. The same could be said about the topic of reproductive freedom as well as the legal politics of race, class, and gender; instructors with an interest in these issues will find them inadequately covered. While there are isolated cases on each of these topics, there is not enough material to build the sort of sustained analysis and discussion that can help students to understand them.

The discussion entitled "What is Law" reveals the dangers of attempting to be both brief and comprehensive. In this introductory section the authors lead the students through a tour of legal concepts beginning with Aristotle and then continuing on to public and private law, constitutional and administrative law, statutory and decisional law, common law and equity, civil law and criminal law, and positive law and natural law. All of this is dealt with in a dizzying eight pages (pp. 3-11) and would be encountered by the students in their first night of reading. The concepts and issues raised in this section require far more explanation and discussion if students are to come away from the course with a solid understanding of the law.

The danger, and I think it has been realized, is that the demand to omit and abbreviate will leave students with a cursory and potentially confusing introduction to constitutional law. This may say less about this work in particular than about the difficulties faced in attempting to responsibly teach constitutional law in one semester or, worse, one quarter. A full-scale course in this area must normally cover legal theory, the court as an institution, and American history, while working in crash courses in economic policy and the unique dynamics of race and gender politics. Some instructors may also try to introduce their students to debates over legal interpretation and argument. Obviously, not all of this can fit into a short course or a short case book in a way that will provide students with a solid and thorough understanding of the issues involved.