Mark Levin delivers some bad news
Mark Levin has bad news for the public: The U.S. Supreme Court has strayed drastically from its founders? intent. In his book Men in Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America, Levin takes on the evolution of the Supreme Court from a simple wing of the government into a ?judicial tyranny.? Levin is a constitutional lawyer who has a top-rated radio program on WABC; he?s served as a top adviser in presidential cabinets and been chief of staff to the attorney general of the United States. His deep love for constitutional law and American history are especially evident as he takes readers through the activist changes of the Supreme Court.
Levin outlines the framework on which our government was created. Men in Black explains that the Supreme Court?s original purpose was not to act as the final word on the law, but to interpret the law based on the United States Constitution.
The book starts out examining the first case in which the Supreme Court created law instead of simply interpreting it, Marbury v. Madison. In that 1803 decision, ?the Supreme Court determined that it had the power to decide cases about the constitutionality of congressional actions and ? when it deemed they violated the Constitution ? overturn them.? This case, the book argues, laid the groundwork for the ?runaway power exercised by the federal courts to this day.? The argument states that this decision was the point at which the judicial branch began to usurp the executive and legislative branches? authority.
Levin continues to link judicial activism with the expansion of the judicial branch?s power. The book argues that activist Supreme Courts are not a modern invention. In addition to the general concept of ?judicial tyranny,? Levin points out there have been times when the Supreme Court ruled well outside the bounds of the U.S. Constitution to force unwelcome concepts onto private enterprise and individuals. The book evolves naturally, including the instances in which the Supreme Court created some overtly racist rulings.
Cases that advance this unconstitutional ebb and flow are outlined throughout the chapters. Neither the 1856 Dred Scott decision forcing slavery in free territories, nor the 1896 Plessy case that forced segregation in a private company, is ignored. It also doesn?t let the reader forget about the 1944 Korematsu case, which upheld the Roosevelt administration?s decision to place American citizens of Japanese descent into internment camps.
Levin uses his book as an effective tool to help anyone break down the series of poor judgments that have lead to the judicial branch?s power expansion. And although Men in Black lends itself to the political at times, at no point is the power of its message lost. The book paints a powerful and worrisome picture of a Supreme Court so intent on ignoring the founding documents that it eventually turns on the basic principles upon which this country was founded. For anyone interested in a history of the Supreme Court?s stray from its original intent, Levin?s book is a gratifying cover-to-cover read.