Raoul Berger (1) (1901–2000)

1733 Congress v. The Supreme Court, by Raoul Berger (read 25 Jul 1982) The author was born in Russia, came to the U.S. as a child, got a master's degree in law from Harvard in 1938,practiced law till 1965, and since has "devoted his time to study and writing on legal problems." This book is a 1969 book wherein he demolishes the idea that the Supreme Court does not have the right of judicial review. He then concludes, Ex parte McArdle notwithstanding, that Congress cannot exercise its power over the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court so as to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or to take private property without just compensation. He goes on to deal some effective blows at sovereign immunity, pointing out there is no constitutional warrant for it. This is an excellent book, and I only wish I could have read it surrounded by a complete law library. Berger so demolishes Crosskey that my long-held desire to read his 1953 book Politics and the Constitution in the History of the United States no longer seems one I should carry out. This was a fun book to read, though I read it far too hurriedly.… (meer)