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.