Supreme Damage: Rescuing Representative Government from Judicial Overreach

For many years, there have been complaints about the US Supreme Court. Under conservative and liberal majorities, it has been accused of judicial overreach, or simply going too far. It's job is supposed to be to interpret existing law and the US Constitution. It is not supposed to make new laws. That's what this book is all about.Roe v. Wade is here, along with Bush v. Gore. National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. Sebelius (the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act) is also here.Have you ever wondered how children born on American soil, even if their parents are undocumented, can automatically become US citizens? That comes from a case called Plyler v. Doe.If a state wants to change the law about public morality, for instance, the right way to do it is to go through the state legislature, or by holding a state-wide referendum. Using the courts is not the way to do it. Lawrence v. Texas, in 2003, legalized same-sex sexual activity. That led to 2015's Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage, nationwide.The Comprehensive Crime Control Act allows law enforcement agencies to divide seized cash and other assets. The threshold for suspicion is extremely low, and encourages law enforcement to abuse the power. It's called civil asset forfeiture. In Bennis v. Michigan, a man had sex with a prostitute in the back of his car. The car was "guilty," so it, and not the owner, was punished (the car was forfeited).This is a very interesting book. The author sticks to the facts as much as possible, chronicling the travels of a case through the legal system. For those whose only exposure to Supreme Court cases is through TV news reports. this book is well worth checking out.

The premise of this book is something I've long believed: because of a dozen or so cases that were wrongly decided by the Supreme Court, the protections for our liberty that are in the U.S. Constitution have badly eroded. This is a conclusion that it took me a long time to reach. But as I read about the various cases over the years, it became increasingly obvious.So it would have saved me a lot of time if I had had Thurman Smith's Supreme Damage in my library years ago. Smith brings all the relevant cases together in one concise and handy volume. We learn, for except, about Kelo vs. New London, in which SCOTUS decided that it was constitutional for a city to confiscate a woman's home and turn it over to a private, for-profit developer, on the grounds that it was "public use." Then there's Wickard vs. Filburn, in which the court ruled that a farmer growing grain for his own use on his own property is "interstate commerce" and subject to federal regulation.For each case, Smith tells us about the background and legal issues, and even gives us some engaging stories about the litigants and judges--all in terms that a non-lawyer can easily understand.In general, I agreed with Smith's assessment of the cases. But even in the one or two instances where I disagreed, and thought that the Supreme Court had uncharacteristically made the *right* decision, it was useful to have to have all the information--which includes detailed references for further study. I got to say, even though I know this subject fairly well, I learned a lot.

"Power to the people" could be the motto for this book on how the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has unconstitutionally become a law-making body. The author well makes the case that this role is not good for a representative form of government. He examines several well-known and not so well-known cases to show what when wrong, and suggests some solutions to restore balance with the legislative branch. The in-line links to websites nicely fleshed out the book material.

Supreme Damage reminded me of all those times I wondered why big issues of public policy were being decided by Supreme Court justices , who aren't elected. The author's remedy to restore representative government is a collection of Constitutional amendments to allow nullification by Congress of decisions that are dramatically contrary to the existing order. The book was also an enjoyable and useful reminder of both well-known and important but less discussed cases.