America on Trial

April 12, 2004
Harvard law professor Dershowitz discusses several dozen cases that he believes provide insight into the transformation of the country and its legal system from the colonial period to the present. As the broad historical sweep of the project suggests, he is forced to compromise by simplifying events that are, by their nature, complex. Consequently, readers familiar with these legal cases will find many of his conclusions one-dimensional. The following observation, drawn from the prologue, gives a sense of how rudimentary the historical treatment often is: "The American colonists were generally familiar with the stories of the Bible." Although Dershowitz claims to have read more trial transcripts than any other living lawyer, his recounting of the legal proceedings is remarkably lackluster. The whole enterprise has more than a little scent of student research about it, supplemented by observations that those familiar with the author's various hobbyhorses willrecognize: his contempt for Justices Scalia and Thomas, whom he implies would have voted to uphold slavery had they participated in the Dred Scott decision; his own self-aggrandizement as he offers critiques of other lawyers, such as Clarence Darrow and Robert Bennett; and his love for the cliché masked as insight—"he acquittal of a guilty murderer may also constitute a miscarriage of justice." While the book reminds readers of many interesting cases that have lapsed into relative obscurity, it is not the place to look for their elucidation. Agent, Helen Rees.

May 1, 2004
In his 21st book, multitalented author, attorney, and professor Dershowitz (law, Harvard) describes 63 famous trials in American history and offers his pointed opinions about the quality of justice. The book is arranged chronologically and includes the Colonial Salem witchcraft trials, the 1868 impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson, Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the impeachment trial of President Clinton, and Bush v. Gore. What is remarkable about the book is Dershowitz's ability to distill the essence of a case into three or four pages, including excerpts from the trial transcripts. The writing is sparkling and places the trials in their historical context. The book is a blend of fact and commentary, as shown by the author's occasional jibes at current Supreme Court justices, whose decisions he considers corrupt. Dershowitz deftly explains his legal positions and does an excellent job of separating myth from reality in American legal cases. Highly recommended for both public and academic libraries. Harry Charles, St. Louis

Copyright 2004 Library Journal, LLC Used with permission.