Constitutional Law: Examples and Explanations

Vol. 15 No.8 (August 2005), pp.679-681

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: EXAMPLES AND EXPLANATIONS (3rd ed) (2 Vols), by Allan Ides and Christopher N. May. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers, 2004. Paper. Volume I, NATIONAL POWER AND FEDERALISM: 389pp. $37.95. ISBN: 0735540543. Volume II, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS: 469pp. $37.95. ISBN: 0735540330.

Reviewed by Priscilla H. M. Zotti, Department of Political Science, United States Naval Academy. Email: zotti@usna.edu .

At the outset, let me say that many of us who teach constitutional law to undergraduates are resistant to the even the idea of changing text books. New editions are fine, but we become comfortable with the case coverage, the commentary, and any supplemental material provided. No text seems to fulfill all our needs, so why bother searching. Most of us feel comfortable with the approach our current text provides and rarely do we give much consideration to exploring the current state of published books. Thus reviewing a constitutional law text for this special issue is a somewhat novel undertaking for me. I do not revisit my textbook selection for my con law courses every semester or even every year. When I do query the current offerings, I always hope to find fresh avenues of inquiry, clever and new ways to approach a classic Supreme Court case, or new insight into the Court’s inner workings. I always hope that the process might open up the possibility of change. Despite the resistance to change, I would recommend to faculty who behave as I do to take a look at Allan Ides’ and Christopher May’s treatment of constitutional law.

In its third edition, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: EXAMPLES AND EXPLANATIONS provides a “problem oriented guide through the principal doctrines of constitutional law – those covered in typical constitutional law courses – with an emphasis on how one might think about issues that arise within the various contexts in which these doctrines operate” (Vol.II, pp.xxi-xxii). This two volume soft back book fills a niche in the pedagogical presentation. It is not designed to replace a casebook or substitute for reading the original language of a case. The volumes are supplemental texts, geared for law students, designed to help them better understand the cases they have read or discussed in class. The books serve students in preparation for class—in other words, to assist them in understanding the case law that they read. The books also provide clear examples to provoke logical and critical thinking and to encourage students to synthesize the case law with legal doctrine. Ides’ and May’s offering is part of a series entitled, “Examples and Explanations” put out by Aspen Publishers. The series reflects the audience that the authors aim to assist, law students. Similar books in the series focus on evidence, contracts, corporate taxes, torts, wills and estates, and the like.

Geared to law students and not a traditional case law book, what do Ides and [*680] May have to offer political scientists? For an undergraduate course in constitutional law, the detail of background and context may be too much. The authors choose depth of knowledge over breadth of case law coverage. Their expertise includes economy. The writing is succinct, clear, and brief. Ides and May move rapidly through the historical and doctrinal context of many subjects, assuming the reader has a working knowledge of the case law, either from class or other texts. However, the depth of knowledge would be appreciated by graduate students of public law. The text is thought provoking for these students, while perhaps overwhelming for undergraduates with little preparation in the field.

Students using this text will not read the court opinions under this book cover. Cases are discussed in brief, the authors giving a summative narrative. The traditional head notes followed by the actual case itself are not found here. It is not what you traditionally see or consider in con law texts. It is a supplemental text, not the primary one for a course in constitutional law. Nevertheless, its contribution to the classroom, particularly for graduate students and law students, is significant.

The two volumes are divided in the traditional manner. Volume I, titled CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: NATIONAL POWER AND FEDERALISM includes a discussion of judicial review, jurisdiction and justiciability, taxing and spending, commerce and other contests of state and federal relations, separation of power, and privileges and immunities. The second volume, focusing on individual rights, includes a presentation of substantive due process, the first amendment, the equal protection clause, and the taking and contract clauses. What is missing is any criminal procedure, which most likely is covered in another book in the series. Those who teach the fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth amendments will not find much analysis of the case law in these areas. While the coverage is not in complete harmony with an undergraduate constitutional law class, the analysis offered is concise and current. The format reiterates the use of the books as support material for a main text.

The feature of the text that I find the most interesting and useful is the example and explanation section found throughout. Each chapter begins with a brief overview and analysis of the legal construct. The basic nuts and bolts of the topic are presented. The authors then move rapidly to provide the reader with examples, often hypotheticals. They are interesting, amusing, and very clear. For example, to provoke student thinking about substantive due process, the authors provide the following: “A city ordinance provides that no household may be occupied by more than two persons under the age of ten. As a result of the ordinance, the Sutro family, which contains three children under the age of ten, is being evicted from the apartment they have lived in for the past 12 years” (Vol.II, p.82). The explanation that follows, with brevity and clarity, points out what students should consider in the example and how best to resolve it. The books are filled with examples and explanations, showcasing the creativity of the authors. I imagine this feature serves as a springboard for lively classroom discussions. [*681]

The historical analysis is always solid. Clearly the authors know the subject matter. One criticism is the brevity of the contextual information. What is difficult to discern is the relative importance of doctrine and case law. All seem to receive equal treatment in space by the authors. For example, with amazing brevity, the authors discuss the historical context and significance of BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION. In about two pages BROWN I, PLESSY v. FERGUSON, and BOLLING v. SHARPE are presented. An additional page includes BROWN II, MILLIKEN v. BRADLEY, and SWANN v. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBERG BOARD OF EDUCATION. This all too brief treatment, while accurate, fails to adequately impart the significance of BROWN in changing the very structure of American society. The resistance to the Court’s role is downplayed. A presentation revealing the inner workings of the Court is missing altogether. The case law is marched through systematically but with little of the historical ground swell. BROWN is high drama in constitutional law. Here it is addressed mechanically. In fairness, this is in keeping with the authors’ interest.

A concise analysis of legal constructs, a brief presentation of case analysis rather than the actual case, and examples and explanations that encourage the application and utility of legal constructs are perfect as a supplemental text in a graduate or law school class in constitutional law. Ides and May provide undergraduate faculty a reference tool complete with provocative examples that serve as “lecture launchers” or discussion material. While Ides and May may not succeed in changing my textbook adoption, I do not think I am their intended audience. The book provides me, as an undergraduate teacher, with a resource to support my courses with contextual material and lively examples. For graduate and law school faculty, the book deserves serious consideration. It is well written, well organized, current, concise, scholarly, and creative.

CASE REFERENCES:

BOLLING v. SHARPE, 347 US 497 (1954).

BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION I, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955).

MILLIKEN v. BRADLEY, 418 US 717 (1974).

PLESSY v. FERGUSON, 163 US 537 (1896).

SWANN v. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBERG BOARD OF EDUCATION, 401 US 1 (1971).

*************************************************