What do you think?
Rate this book
Louis D. Brandeis: American Prophet
According to Jeffrey Rosen, Louis D. Brandeis was “the Jewish Jefferson,” the greatest critic of what he called “the curse of bigness,” in business and government, since the author of the Declaration of Independence. Published to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of his Supreme Court confirmation on June 1, 1916, Louis D. Brandeis: American Prophet argues that Brandeis was the most farseeing constitutional philosopher of the twentieth century. In addition to writing the most famous article on the right to privacy, he also wrote the most important Supreme Court opinions about free speech, freedom from government surveillance, and freedom of thought and opinion. And as the leader of the American Zionist movement, he convinced Woodrow Wilson and the British government to recognize a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Combining narrative biography with a passionate argument for why Brandeis matters today, Rosen explores what Brandeis, the Jeffersonian prophet, can teach us about historic and contemporary questions involving the Constitution, monopoly, corporate and federal power, technology, privacy, free speech, and Zionism.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2016
48 people are currently reading
627 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
June 11, 2016
In 2013 I read Melvin I. Urofsky’s “Louis D. Brandeis: A Life.” When I saw Rosen’s book on Brandeis, that was published in June 2016, I almost past it up, but then bought it. Brandeis is one of my historical heroes and I just wanted to see what Rosen had to say. I am very glad I did as the book is not really a biography of LDB but a review of his philosophies and legal decisions and how they relate to today problems. LDB was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Wilson one hundred years ago this year.
Rosen built a case showing how Brandeis’ decisions and philosophy are important and relevant to today’s issues. Rosen has crafted a careful study of Brandeis’ key points and compares them to today’s problems. Rosen has done meticulous research and the book is well written. Brandeis was a critic of bigness as was Thomas Jefferson and Rosen compares the two men’s viewpoints. LDB denounced big banks, big government and big business; he was a critic of concentration of financial power and a big opponent of J. P. Morgan. Rosen shows how the stock-market crash of 1929 vindicated LDB’s viewpoint.
LDB was an advocate of free speech and privacy. Rosen reveals how he almost foretold the technological age and its issues of privacy and free speech. Rosen discusses Brandeis’ book published in 1913 entitled “Other People’s Money” and how its premise of protection of liberty and opposition to monopoly went hand in hand. Louis D. Brandies was devoted to free speech, privacy and pro-immigration diversity, and a mistrust of big business and big government.
Rosen discusses LDB’s viewpoints and solutions to these issues and how these compare to the current political presidential candidates’ viewpoints, as well as how current judicial philosophy compares to LDB’s. Rosen says we all should ask ourselves on these key issues “What would Brandies do?” The author states that on today’s Supreme Court there are three scholars of Brandies and they are Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Stephen Breyer. The book is 257 pages long and is easy to read for the average lay person.
Rosen built a case showing how Brandeis’ decisions and philosophy are important and relevant to today’s issues. Rosen has crafted a careful study of Brandeis’ key points and compares them to today’s problems. Rosen has done meticulous research and the book is well written. Brandeis was a critic of bigness as was Thomas Jefferson and Rosen compares the two men’s viewpoints. LDB denounced big banks, big government and big business; he was a critic of concentration of financial power and a big opponent of J. P. Morgan. Rosen shows how the stock-market crash of 1929 vindicated LDB’s viewpoint.
LDB was an advocate of free speech and privacy. Rosen reveals how he almost foretold the technological age and its issues of privacy and free speech. Rosen discusses Brandeis’ book published in 1913 entitled “Other People’s Money” and how its premise of protection of liberty and opposition to monopoly went hand in hand. Louis D. Brandies was devoted to free speech, privacy and pro-immigration diversity, and a mistrust of big business and big government.
Rosen discusses LDB’s viewpoints and solutions to these issues and how these compare to the current political presidential candidates’ viewpoints, as well as how current judicial philosophy compares to LDB’s. Rosen says we all should ask ourselves on these key issues “What would Brandies do?” The author states that on today’s Supreme Court there are three scholars of Brandies and they are Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Stephen Breyer. The book is 257 pages long and is easy to read for the average lay person.
August 4, 2016
The Constitution, monopoly, corporate and federal power, technology, privacy, free speech, and Zionism. States’ rights, secularism, freedom from government surveillance, and freedom of thought and opinion. Private companies and lobbying interest’s money in politics. All these are topics of the current day.
In Jeffrey Rosen’s “Louis D. Brandies – American Profit” part of Yale Press’s Jewish Lives series, we learn that they were the concerns of a Supreme Court Justice who had the ear of Presidents from Woodrow Wilson through FDR who respectively referred to him as Isiah.
I hope I do not ramble and can make sense of this great little novel.
He was worried about banks and corporate power – of money in politics having too much influence over the common man.
He railed for education as the most important factor for a Democracy to flourish. He was very Jeffersonian in his thinking and this is spiced into the narrative of the novel throughout.
Brandies argued before the crashes of early 1900’s through the New Deal 30’s against much of what led to the collapse of the economy at the end of the George W. Bush presidency. In fact many of the restrictions of finance and banking put in place during the FDR administration after the crash of 29 were the result of ideas he championed. His published novel “Other People’s Money” predicted many of these issues that came to a head from deregulation in the 80’s, 90’s and early 2000’s just as it had in the early part of the last century. He was willing to have a less efficient democracy in order to maintain long term success over short term gains. He was a conservative investor himself and was against much of the wild speculation and loan practices that were, as he defined them, “financial recklessness” - investment bankers took to control industries threating small investors whose assets they were supposed to protect. The huge loans backed by, really, nothing all in an effort to increase stock prices on the backs of other people’s money showed an “extraordinary lack of financial prudence” When money became tight and the loans repaid, companies were forced to sell at depressed prices and left no money for dividends. In his view this showed a failure of banker management that was not accidental but structural: “The Natural result of confusing the functions of banker and business man.” The “Curse of Bigness” as he called it was what we now call “To big to fail.”
His idea that, “Man is weak and his judgement is at best fallible,” and further Alexander M. Bickel held that Brandies expressed, in Bickel’s words: “That Mans Judgement, properly informed, has immense potential, and that it should enable him to command circumstances and to shape the conditions of his life to a rational and satisfactory pattern. Man’s single fatal limitation was his reluctance to understand his own limitations and to pace himself and his efforts accordingly. But this reluctance could be, and it had to be overcome. The paradox of limited man and his practically limitless potential was thus at the core of Brandeis’ faith, and it gave him his unique combination of passion and patience.”
“Curb of bigness is indispensable to true Democracy & Liberty. It is the very foundation also of wisdom in human things.” He was against centralized government and cheered local democracy and coined the term of “States as the laboratories of Democracy.” Yet he pursued regulatory oversight of business as a form of protection over the curse of bigness.
“…If the Lord had intended things to be big, he would have made man bigger -in brains and character.”
Like Jefferson he believed the greatest threats to a constitutional democracy was an uneducated citizenry. He believed it could not survive both ignorant and free. He was for limited government that allowed rigorous self-education in order to develop their faculties in order to fully participate in American democracy. He is today held in esteem by three of the current Supreme Court Justices.
His “Brandies brief” is used by many – when looking at any case “nobody can form a judgement that is worth having without a fairly detailed and intimate knowledge of the facts.” Brandies once called his brief, “What every fool knows.”
I found this novel incredibly fascinating and well written. It is not a biography but a study of ideas he thought and why he thought them. He lived in a time of intense polarization between conservatives and Libertarians, who prefer small government and free enterprise, and liberal and progressives, who advocate a more energetic social welfare state, Brandies is a figure in history who represents and blended the ideas of both.
I am very glad to have discover this book and I will look to read more thoroughly about him, truly an “American Prophet”
In Jeffrey Rosen’s “Louis D. Brandies – American Profit” part of Yale Press’s Jewish Lives series, we learn that they were the concerns of a Supreme Court Justice who had the ear of Presidents from Woodrow Wilson through FDR who respectively referred to him as Isiah.
I hope I do not ramble and can make sense of this great little novel.
He was worried about banks and corporate power – of money in politics having too much influence over the common man.
He railed for education as the most important factor for a Democracy to flourish. He was very Jeffersonian in his thinking and this is spiced into the narrative of the novel throughout.
Brandies argued before the crashes of early 1900’s through the New Deal 30’s against much of what led to the collapse of the economy at the end of the George W. Bush presidency. In fact many of the restrictions of finance and banking put in place during the FDR administration after the crash of 29 were the result of ideas he championed. His published novel “Other People’s Money” predicted many of these issues that came to a head from deregulation in the 80’s, 90’s and early 2000’s just as it had in the early part of the last century. He was willing to have a less efficient democracy in order to maintain long term success over short term gains. He was a conservative investor himself and was against much of the wild speculation and loan practices that were, as he defined them, “financial recklessness” - investment bankers took to control industries threating small investors whose assets they were supposed to protect. The huge loans backed by, really, nothing all in an effort to increase stock prices on the backs of other people’s money showed an “extraordinary lack of financial prudence” When money became tight and the loans repaid, companies were forced to sell at depressed prices and left no money for dividends. In his view this showed a failure of banker management that was not accidental but structural: “The Natural result of confusing the functions of banker and business man.” The “Curse of Bigness” as he called it was what we now call “To big to fail.”
His idea that, “Man is weak and his judgement is at best fallible,” and further Alexander M. Bickel held that Brandies expressed, in Bickel’s words: “That Mans Judgement, properly informed, has immense potential, and that it should enable him to command circumstances and to shape the conditions of his life to a rational and satisfactory pattern. Man’s single fatal limitation was his reluctance to understand his own limitations and to pace himself and his efforts accordingly. But this reluctance could be, and it had to be overcome. The paradox of limited man and his practically limitless potential was thus at the core of Brandeis’ faith, and it gave him his unique combination of passion and patience.”
“Curb of bigness is indispensable to true Democracy & Liberty. It is the very foundation also of wisdom in human things.” He was against centralized government and cheered local democracy and coined the term of “States as the laboratories of Democracy.” Yet he pursued regulatory oversight of business as a form of protection over the curse of bigness.
“…If the Lord had intended things to be big, he would have made man bigger -in brains and character.”
Like Jefferson he believed the greatest threats to a constitutional democracy was an uneducated citizenry. He believed it could not survive both ignorant and free. He was for limited government that allowed rigorous self-education in order to develop their faculties in order to fully participate in American democracy. He is today held in esteem by three of the current Supreme Court Justices.
His “Brandies brief” is used by many – when looking at any case “nobody can form a judgement that is worth having without a fairly detailed and intimate knowledge of the facts.” Brandies once called his brief, “What every fool knows.”
I found this novel incredibly fascinating and well written. It is not a biography but a study of ideas he thought and why he thought them. He lived in a time of intense polarization between conservatives and Libertarians, who prefer small government and free enterprise, and liberal and progressives, who advocate a more energetic social welfare state, Brandies is a figure in history who represents and blended the ideas of both.
I am very glad to have discover this book and I will look to read more thoroughly about him, truly an “American Prophet”
April 1, 2021
Well-written biography of one of the most important American jurists of the first half of the twentieth century; an unrelenting fighter against "the curse of bigness", a devoted civil libertarian, the first Jewish Supreme Court justice with impact beyond the majority opinions he has written, and also an immensely important figure in the American Zionist movement. This is not the most thorough biography of Brandeis (if one wants a such, look for Melvin Urofsky's "Louis D. Brandeis: A Life"), but rather a more analytical survey through Brandeis' life through contemporary lenses, including the last chapter which literally asks what would Brandeis do in contemporary America. The author obviously admires Brandeis (I believe only a few would not after studying him), so he is clearly biased in his narrative, nevertheless, he does not shy of showing some more controversial aspects of Brandeis' life and Supreme Court decisions (concurrences with eugenics for instance). Rosen greatly shows how Brandeis, despite being a cornerstone Progressive figure, does not neatly fit in neither today's Left nor Right in America - his despise of bigness was not reserved for the corporations, but for the all-doing government as well. This is not a fake and shallow, power-driven centrism (as we in Slovakia know a lot of), but rather a balanced and nuanced perspective, derived from his "sense of balance and proportion, his acute awareness of human limitations."
A late chapter about Brandeis' devotion to the Zionist cause is very interesting in itself - particularly in his philosophical connections of the "Americanism" to Zionism and his, unfortunately, unaccepted plans, for the structure of the Jewish state.
Brandeis' intellectual brilliance, driving his perspectives on world affairs, as well as David versus Goliath style battles with JP Morgan, seem so noble and different from today's legal and political world, that one is left with only a desire to know more about this great man.
A late chapter about Brandeis' devotion to the Zionist cause is very interesting in itself - particularly in his philosophical connections of the "Americanism" to Zionism and his, unfortunately, unaccepted plans, for the structure of the Jewish state.
Brandeis' intellectual brilliance, driving his perspectives on world affairs, as well as David versus Goliath style battles with JP Morgan, seem so noble and different from today's legal and political world, that one is left with only a desire to know more about this great man.
March 30, 2020
I try each year to focus on a certain genre, so for 2020 I picked biographies. I found this series called Jewish Lives that is published by Yale University Press, and this my first dip into the series. Brandeis is known for being the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice, as well as being an authority on constitutional law, monopolies, unions, and other issues related to protecting the common man from big business. From this book, he didn't seem to be particularly observant but he was a strong supporter of the Zionist movement. He also was a philanthropist and donated a lot of money he accumulated (he was very thrifty) to higher education. My only issue is I wish it included more about his personal life instead of focusing on his career, but it's a short book so there are plenty of longer books on the subject. The good thing about this series is it makes you decide whether you want to read more about the person. This series is a good bar mitzvah gift, but the reading level may be advanced for a 13 year old.
February 9, 2021
Economics is not my strong suit and in the chapter, "Other People's Money," a book by Brandeis, this was a very deep chapter for me. In fact, I resorted to grazing because I knew I couldn't learn without making a true effort of underlining and quizzing myself. Oh, but there is plenty of information that a person could apply to their personal life in the book.
As the title purports that Brandeis was an American Prophet, it would be difficult to put the book on the nightstand without agreeing, he was a true prophet. I knew some basic facts about the man, and to suggest this book as a casual read, I wouldn't do so, but, if for a high school or college paper support, it's excellent. He was considered the "people's lawyer," and in doing so, predicted the economic crash of 1929.
There is also explanation into what became known as the Brandeis Brief. This transformed American Civil Rights litigation. Thurgood Marshall and the late RBG were inspired in their arguments about African Americans and women when he designed and reminded the public to not use deductive analysis, constitutional decisions should be informed facts and evidence. He thought it should be called, "What Every Fool Knows."
[He] Always believed in free speech and took his Jewish standards to hearing one side of an argument and expressing value and possible truth, and then hearing the other side of a case and sometimes also seeing how this could be of importance and also for importance to grow, may also have truths. Self-education was his mantra and he had no faith in . . . to use his word "ignorant" people.
The book guides you through his beliefs and in the area of believing in the ethical sense of small business, he would have despised Home Depot and loved the corner handyman store. His intense desire for principle may have stemmed from his mother who was staunch on honor and honesty even though it was not a strict Jewish home.
In accordance with Jefferson -- a person I continue to read biographies about his interesting life -- Brandeis compared himself to him in many ways -- even in horticulture. Oh, not to the extent of Jefferson and there are a couple of phrases of the obvious factor of slavery in Jefferson's life, that invites you to then begin noticing how far did Brandeis go in his cursing of bigness and how it crowds a thinking America?
Jefferson varied though, because he was considered a shopaholic to Brandeis, as one might suspect, he was frugal and made his fortune early and then followed by doing pro bono work most of his life as he believed he had plenty for his family, a wife and two daughters. Even when the Supreme Court building was finished, he refused to move into it because it was an extravagant Marble Palace. It probably mentioned when he decided to join the other judges, but I didn't note that part. Jefferson left his presidency owing $20,000 which by today, would be a weekend of secret service watching you play golf maybe, I don't know, but, the two men shared great ideas of how people could come together for the good of their life and their country, but, their personal needs varied.
An example of the prophet, he and FDR had disagreements -- a strong example was the Second New Deal and how Roosevelt learned from Brandeis a combination of other approaches that would be passed and admired. Why did FDR call Brandeis "old Isaiah" or, in the affectionate letters he wrote until the justice's death in 1941, "My dear Isaiah"? There were many reasons you would have to take from the book -- it was visual as his high cheekbones and similarities to A. Lincoln. And then, to the biblical sense which are fascinating words about shared ideas of righteousness and standards to all the world. Bible-wise, Isaiah foretold the birth of King Cyrus. For those studying this on a Judaism level, there is an odd dip of relatives into Frankism. Otherwise, it's a lesson that there are people who do not build their life on greed, facts matter. And, trying to live a bi-partisan life, at work and on the global stage.
Who should be gifted this book or want to read it? Yale University Press which Brandeis had the top grades in the history of the law school and someone who struggled to write for the common man to understand and use, maybe in a gift packet for someone graduating high school? All history, but nearly every page is pertinent to today. From a review on the back cover and I'd heard this previously, "Brandeis also wrote the most important Supreme Court opinions about free speech, freedom from government surveillance, and freedom of thought and opinion." He's still relevant! His deep beliefs about privacy will be used throughout our lives. Another direct quote guides us to his legend of that period of time and is applicable today and can solve one problem I've experienced with friends who defend the right to bear arms. And my response is usually something about, at the time that our Founders struggled to design a map, they could not have foreseen that groups of friends or neighbors could buy military styled weaponry to use against people they do not know, or have much in common except, perhaps age. "Brandeis was not a strict constructionist and did not share Jefferson's belief that Congress could only exercise powers explicitly enumerated in the original Constitution. He insisted that the 'living law' had to adapt to social change and attempted to translate the values of the framer of the Constitution into an age of technologies and mass-production methods they could not have imagined." One sad aspect, of course we know our U.S. presidents like FDR and Abe, but how many know the genius of Louis Brandeis? He wasn't a president so we didn't have to memorize his name in grade school.
I learned a great deal about Zionism from his view. How he viewed Israel as available land -- and like Jefferson, could use a few seeds for orchards, but the seriousness of how anti-Semitism could be formed depending upon your vision and his perception was not particularly politics. Because most Jews were culturally or religiously more Jewish, he wanted a more ideological state. These parts, very good reads about the immigration status. At the beginning of the British mandate (1922) through 1948, the biography supports his short-sightedness as he thought malaria would be eliminated for Jews and Arabs alike. Reading about Palestine, for me, it's a continuous interrogation and the pages devoted to this are rich with details and Brandeis' continuous belief in individuality. There are endless "beauties" in this book and one of them is understanding this man who was born in Louisville, KY and believed that Palestinians should have a legally secure home for Jews and Muslim and Christian Arabs and the request for every home in Kentucky receive a copy of the 1927 copyright of Albert Jay Nock's famous Jefferson. Brandeis considered the book be called "the worthiest account of our most civilized American and true Democrat." (Let's not mentioned slavery right here, though.) The National Home Library Foundation issued a reprint on Brandeis' eighty-fourth birthday and was dedicated to Mr. Justice Louis Brandeis, Friend of all just men and a lover of the Right.' That's when Brandeis reciprocated this tribute by suggesting a copy go to every high school or similar institution in Kentucky. Self-education. Activism.
As the title purports that Brandeis was an American Prophet, it would be difficult to put the book on the nightstand without agreeing, he was a true prophet. I knew some basic facts about the man, and to suggest this book as a casual read, I wouldn't do so, but, if for a high school or college paper support, it's excellent. He was considered the "people's lawyer," and in doing so, predicted the economic crash of 1929.
There is also explanation into what became known as the Brandeis Brief. This transformed American Civil Rights litigation. Thurgood Marshall and the late RBG were inspired in their arguments about African Americans and women when he designed and reminded the public to not use deductive analysis, constitutional decisions should be informed facts and evidence. He thought it should be called, "What Every Fool Knows."
[He] Always believed in free speech and took his Jewish standards to hearing one side of an argument and expressing value and possible truth, and then hearing the other side of a case and sometimes also seeing how this could be of importance and also for importance to grow, may also have truths. Self-education was his mantra and he had no faith in . . . to use his word "ignorant" people.
The book guides you through his beliefs and in the area of believing in the ethical sense of small business, he would have despised Home Depot and loved the corner handyman store. His intense desire for principle may have stemmed from his mother who was staunch on honor and honesty even though it was not a strict Jewish home.
In accordance with Jefferson -- a person I continue to read biographies about his interesting life -- Brandeis compared himself to him in many ways -- even in horticulture. Oh, not to the extent of Jefferson and there are a couple of phrases of the obvious factor of slavery in Jefferson's life, that invites you to then begin noticing how far did Brandeis go in his cursing of bigness and how it crowds a thinking America?
Jefferson varied though, because he was considered a shopaholic to Brandeis, as one might suspect, he was frugal and made his fortune early and then followed by doing pro bono work most of his life as he believed he had plenty for his family, a wife and two daughters. Even when the Supreme Court building was finished, he refused to move into it because it was an extravagant Marble Palace. It probably mentioned when he decided to join the other judges, but I didn't note that part. Jefferson left his presidency owing $20,000 which by today, would be a weekend of secret service watching you play golf maybe, I don't know, but, the two men shared great ideas of how people could come together for the good of their life and their country, but, their personal needs varied.
An example of the prophet, he and FDR had disagreements -- a strong example was the Second New Deal and how Roosevelt learned from Brandeis a combination of other approaches that would be passed and admired. Why did FDR call Brandeis "old Isaiah" or, in the affectionate letters he wrote until the justice's death in 1941, "My dear Isaiah"? There were many reasons you would have to take from the book -- it was visual as his high cheekbones and similarities to A. Lincoln. And then, to the biblical sense which are fascinating words about shared ideas of righteousness and standards to all the world. Bible-wise, Isaiah foretold the birth of King Cyrus. For those studying this on a Judaism level, there is an odd dip of relatives into Frankism. Otherwise, it's a lesson that there are people who do not build their life on greed, facts matter. And, trying to live a bi-partisan life, at work and on the global stage.
Who should be gifted this book or want to read it? Yale University Press which Brandeis had the top grades in the history of the law school and someone who struggled to write for the common man to understand and use, maybe in a gift packet for someone graduating high school? All history, but nearly every page is pertinent to today. From a review on the back cover and I'd heard this previously, "Brandeis also wrote the most important Supreme Court opinions about free speech, freedom from government surveillance, and freedom of thought and opinion." He's still relevant! His deep beliefs about privacy will be used throughout our lives. Another direct quote guides us to his legend of that period of time and is applicable today and can solve one problem I've experienced with friends who defend the right to bear arms. And my response is usually something about, at the time that our Founders struggled to design a map, they could not have foreseen that groups of friends or neighbors could buy military styled weaponry to use against people they do not know, or have much in common except, perhaps age. "Brandeis was not a strict constructionist and did not share Jefferson's belief that Congress could only exercise powers explicitly enumerated in the original Constitution. He insisted that the 'living law' had to adapt to social change and attempted to translate the values of the framer of the Constitution into an age of technologies and mass-production methods they could not have imagined." One sad aspect, of course we know our U.S. presidents like FDR and Abe, but how many know the genius of Louis Brandeis? He wasn't a president so we didn't have to memorize his name in grade school.
I learned a great deal about Zionism from his view. How he viewed Israel as available land -- and like Jefferson, could use a few seeds for orchards, but the seriousness of how anti-Semitism could be formed depending upon your vision and his perception was not particularly politics. Because most Jews were culturally or religiously more Jewish, he wanted a more ideological state. These parts, very good reads about the immigration status. At the beginning of the British mandate (1922) through 1948, the biography supports his short-sightedness as he thought malaria would be eliminated for Jews and Arabs alike. Reading about Palestine, for me, it's a continuous interrogation and the pages devoted to this are rich with details and Brandeis' continuous belief in individuality. There are endless "beauties" in this book and one of them is understanding this man who was born in Louisville, KY and believed that Palestinians should have a legally secure home for Jews and Muslim and Christian Arabs and the request for every home in Kentucky receive a copy of the 1927 copyright of Albert Jay Nock's famous Jefferson. Brandeis considered the book be called "the worthiest account of our most civilized American and true Democrat." (Let's not mentioned slavery right here, though.) The National Home Library Foundation issued a reprint on Brandeis' eighty-fourth birthday and was dedicated to Mr. Justice Louis Brandeis, Friend of all just men and a lover of the Right.' That's when Brandeis reciprocated this tribute by suggesting a copy go to every high school or similar institution in Kentucky. Self-education. Activism.
December 30, 2016
(2 1/2). I picked this up after Michael Lewis talked about it in his paragraph of important books for 2016 in the N.Y. Sunday Times book review. If you are a big time researcher, a Supreme Court afficianado or a legal eagle this is probably an important book. Otherwise, it is a bitch to get through most of it. Brandeis is a really important part of American judicial history, but trying to get through all the legal talk and writing that is here in explaining his philosophies can be daunting. His legacy is strong, which is well explained in the epilogue, and the chapter on his becoming one of the leading spokespeople for Zionism in the world is also solid, but getting there was tough. I need something a little easier to read next!
June 15, 2016
A brief, but brilliant and enlightening bio of this most indispensable American. Definitely worth a read and deeper reflection afterwards. Brandeis is keenly relevant for our own era on many levels.
Read
June 22, 2016A new biography demonstrates Louis D. Brandeis’s foresight in explicating issues that are still at the heart of political and constitutional debate. Review by Maron L. Waxman for the Jewish Book Council.
January 14, 2017
xoxo brandeis alumnus
October 11, 2018
An astute, brief bio which avoids recapitulating the material covered by the judge's other biographers, instead focusing on his legal principles with emphasis on how they would measure up today. Rosen is an excellent (and studiously nonpartisan) legal writer and commentator with an interest in constitutional history.
Brandeis switched opinions often: from anti- to pro-Zionism, anti- to pro-women's suffrage, anti- to pro-unions. He was opposed to "bigness" - big business, big government, and even big unions; a Jeffersonian agrarian libertarian who thought that small, engaged communities were the best political model.
This made him a more liberal figure, opposed as he was to the big trusts of the Gilded Age. Nominated by Wilson, his confirmation was very controversial for the time (ha!), the first to have a public hearing and still the longest - not because of antisemitism, though it existed (his SCOTUS colleague James Clark McReynolds would leave the room when he started talking), but mainly because he was against JP Morgan and his ilk. Brandeis wrote a book called Other People's Money and How the Bankers Use It critiquing the financial system, which became a lot more popular after 1929. One of the interesting modern-day issues not directly mentioned in the book is the idea of Amazon as a monopoly. Lina Khan has led her "hipster antitrust" crusade against the company, which relies on redefining the law to cover even a company which does not make prices more expensive for consumers, but has other insidious effects. It seems that Brandeis might have been sympathetic to this, just as he might have opposed other behemoth retail chains like Walmart - an opposition to their very bigness as something inconducive to civil engagement and community life.
Brandeis' (perhaps more famous) colleague OW Holmes Jr. was pragmatist almost to the point of nihilism - he propounded a legal realism that saw the law basically as what exists when judges decide. Brandeis himself was more of what we might call a Positivist. His famous 'Brandeis Brief' was 98% sociological/empirical facts, not abstract arguments about legal principles. Only by analysing the real life impact of the issues did he think that the legal solution could be found. (Brandeis was also an elitist who thought that consumers were dumb and the agrarian life the ideal, and that Periclean Athens was the height of civilisation.)
On modern-day issues, Rosen thinks that Clinton-era neoliberalism (such as the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which Brandeis helped put in place) is 'unBrandeisian', as it allows the growth of huge financial monsters - and in fact during the financial crisis the 'too big to fail' banks got bailed out, not the smaller ones who had avoided dodgy proprietary trading. The Dodd-Frank Act, according to Rosen, was an attempt to bring some of this back, although a more Brandeisian solution would have been to tax financial services companies above a certain size, basically keeping them small. (Apparently this was floated in 2008 but died in Congress.)
Other major Brandeis ideas include the right to privacy (a term he invented!), but also the idea that "sunlight is the best disinfectant" in terms of the public's right to know. His far-seeing dissent in 'Olmstead vs US' said that the government wiretapping a citizen's phone was an illegal violation of privacy (he also thought that TV was two-way communication, an idea more premature than wrong!)
In an epilogue, Rosen tosses up a few other interesting issues: he thinks Brandeis would not have included the EU's "right to be forgotten" in the right to privacy (as it goes against freedom of speech), but maybe would have opposed vertical media mergers (such as that of AT&T and Time Warner earlier this year) and the cancellation of "net neutrality". He believed that it was worth sacrificing efficiency for the sake of democratic engagement. But on the other hand, perhaps he would have felt that the internet provides other outlets for engagement, an omnipresent village square reducing the need for the corner shop. A stretch? Either way, his greatest legacy was in always keeping an open mind and continual self education. Those interested in more self-education on this kind of stuff might want to look at this great, very wonky podcast or Rosen's own.
Brandeis switched opinions often: from anti- to pro-Zionism, anti- to pro-women's suffrage, anti- to pro-unions. He was opposed to "bigness" - big business, big government, and even big unions; a Jeffersonian agrarian libertarian who thought that small, engaged communities were the best political model.
This made him a more liberal figure, opposed as he was to the big trusts of the Gilded Age. Nominated by Wilson, his confirmation was very controversial for the time (ha!), the first to have a public hearing and still the longest - not because of antisemitism, though it existed (his SCOTUS colleague James Clark McReynolds would leave the room when he started talking), but mainly because he was against JP Morgan and his ilk. Brandeis wrote a book called Other People's Money and How the Bankers Use It critiquing the financial system, which became a lot more popular after 1929. One of the interesting modern-day issues not directly mentioned in the book is the idea of Amazon as a monopoly. Lina Khan has led her "hipster antitrust" crusade against the company, which relies on redefining the law to cover even a company which does not make prices more expensive for consumers, but has other insidious effects. It seems that Brandeis might have been sympathetic to this, just as he might have opposed other behemoth retail chains like Walmart - an opposition to their very bigness as something inconducive to civil engagement and community life.
Brandeis' (perhaps more famous) colleague OW Holmes Jr. was pragmatist almost to the point of nihilism - he propounded a legal realism that saw the law basically as what exists when judges decide. Brandeis himself was more of what we might call a Positivist. His famous 'Brandeis Brief' was 98% sociological/empirical facts, not abstract arguments about legal principles. Only by analysing the real life impact of the issues did he think that the legal solution could be found. (Brandeis was also an elitist who thought that consumers were dumb and the agrarian life the ideal, and that Periclean Athens was the height of civilisation.)
On modern-day issues, Rosen thinks that Clinton-era neoliberalism (such as the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which Brandeis helped put in place) is 'unBrandeisian', as it allows the growth of huge financial monsters - and in fact during the financial crisis the 'too big to fail' banks got bailed out, not the smaller ones who had avoided dodgy proprietary trading. The Dodd-Frank Act, according to Rosen, was an attempt to bring some of this back, although a more Brandeisian solution would have been to tax financial services companies above a certain size, basically keeping them small. (Apparently this was floated in 2008 but died in Congress.)
Other major Brandeis ideas include the right to privacy (a term he invented!), but also the idea that "sunlight is the best disinfectant" in terms of the public's right to know. His far-seeing dissent in 'Olmstead vs US' said that the government wiretapping a citizen's phone was an illegal violation of privacy (he also thought that TV was two-way communication, an idea more premature than wrong!)
In an epilogue, Rosen tosses up a few other interesting issues: he thinks Brandeis would not have included the EU's "right to be forgotten" in the right to privacy (as it goes against freedom of speech), but maybe would have opposed vertical media mergers (such as that of AT&T and Time Warner earlier this year) and the cancellation of "net neutrality". He believed that it was worth sacrificing efficiency for the sake of democratic engagement. But on the other hand, perhaps he would have felt that the internet provides other outlets for engagement, an omnipresent village square reducing the need for the corner shop. A stretch? Either way, his greatest legacy was in always keeping an open mind and continual self education. Those interested in more self-education on this kind of stuff might want to look at this great, very wonky podcast or Rosen's own.
February 27, 2021
As Mr. Rosen says, this is not the only biography of a complex figure with multiple layers of significance, as an activist-bureaucrat, Supreme Court Justice, and American Zionist, all of which come together in a form of American liberalism, that Mr. Rosen characterizes squarely as Jeffersonian, with both men against "the curse of bigness," be this of monopoly in business, or increased government regulatory powers. The repeated and direct comparison to Jefferson is just one of the signals that Rosen at times verges on hagiography, though he is honest on some of Brandeis' shortcomings -- on race, most outstandingly, and with brief mention of a decision to strike down child-labor laws that is quite interesting (Hoftstadter also mentions this one, calling it "puzzling"). In the balance, though, the figure of Brandeis is useful as a bridge between sides currently over polarized, as we can see from the influence of his thoughts on privacy and judicial restraint on Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Elena Kagan as much as on John Roberts.
The book should probably accompany or follow along with other discussions of the Progressive era and the evolving evaluations of the various strategies of the US government toward the Trusts and robber barons, and vice versa. Howard Zinn's verdict in A People's History of the United States was of course that no administration went far enough. Hofstadter, in The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It, took the nuanced view that Teddy Roosevelt was far more conservative than he advertised, that more anti-trust work happened in the single Taft administration than in TR's two terms. Strangely, after reading Hoftsadter, this book, and Berg's Wilson, I feel even more confused than ever on the Wilson administration, with its complex patterns of progressive reforms against and with the national mobilization for the First World War.
In terms of jurisprudence, Rosen gives a blow-by-blow account of the cases which is hard to summarize if you don't take good notes. Suffice to say that Brandeis had a head for factual and empirical data, and his method of outlining background information at the head of the legal brief is now the standard "Brandeis brief." One pictures a mind constantly roving for facts -- he would have loved the internet and Google, and sort of imagined them in various ways over the course of his life.
On Zionism, Rosen does not dwell on the tragic nature of Brandeis' early generation effort to imagine an American-style "empire of liberty" with room for Palestinian voices, but I suppose it's there if you read between the lines. (One wonders a bit about Brandeis' attitude toward native Americans, the analogous subalterns in the domestic empire.)
Perhaps most revealing here is that the issues comprising the American political poles shift like lumps from a lava-lamp. Before we peg Brandeis as a member of the "left," we must see that his deep suspicion of "bigness" sounds quite conservative (hence Rosen begins with Justice Brandeis putting the breaks on the first wave of New Deal policies in the 1930s), and may even have influenced Friedrich Hayek, making Brandeis in an odd way an ideological grandparent to the libertarians. There are more interesting situations of this sort throughout the book. It will definitely be one to return to in snippets as the great project of history reading goes on.
The book should probably accompany or follow along with other discussions of the Progressive era and the evolving evaluations of the various strategies of the US government toward the Trusts and robber barons, and vice versa. Howard Zinn's verdict in A People's History of the United States was of course that no administration went far enough. Hofstadter, in The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It, took the nuanced view that Teddy Roosevelt was far more conservative than he advertised, that more anti-trust work happened in the single Taft administration than in TR's two terms. Strangely, after reading Hoftsadter, this book, and Berg's Wilson, I feel even more confused than ever on the Wilson administration, with its complex patterns of progressive reforms against and with the national mobilization for the First World War.
In terms of jurisprudence, Rosen gives a blow-by-blow account of the cases which is hard to summarize if you don't take good notes. Suffice to say that Brandeis had a head for factual and empirical data, and his method of outlining background information at the head of the legal brief is now the standard "Brandeis brief." One pictures a mind constantly roving for facts -- he would have loved the internet and Google, and sort of imagined them in various ways over the course of his life.
On Zionism, Rosen does not dwell on the tragic nature of Brandeis' early generation effort to imagine an American-style "empire of liberty" with room for Palestinian voices, but I suppose it's there if you read between the lines. (One wonders a bit about Brandeis' attitude toward native Americans, the analogous subalterns in the domestic empire.)
Perhaps most revealing here is that the issues comprising the American political poles shift like lumps from a lava-lamp. Before we peg Brandeis as a member of the "left," we must see that his deep suspicion of "bigness" sounds quite conservative (hence Rosen begins with Justice Brandeis putting the breaks on the first wave of New Deal policies in the 1930s), and may even have influenced Friedrich Hayek, making Brandeis in an odd way an ideological grandparent to the libertarians. There are more interesting situations of this sort throughout the book. It will definitely be one to return to in snippets as the great project of history reading goes on.
May 26, 2018
Recently, discussion of Bandeis has become somewhat popular in leftish circles. At a time when Bernie Sanders is still derided as a socialist (he is not actually socialist, despite his protestations Brandeis is presented as an example of a more American style proponent of anti-monopoly thinking. It is not clear that Rosen was actually attempting to present Brandeis in this manner, however, this work clearly does have that effect.
One of the most interesting things about Rosen's work is the discussion of the influence on Brandeis of Albert Jay Nock. This requires some explanation. Albert Jay Nock is an author often used, or more accuratetly misused by right wing conservatives and libertarians. His work can be encountered in the study of William F. Buckley or Murray Rothbard, and in fact Nock is a strong opponent of expansive government. However, a right wing reading of Nock can only be facilitated only by looking for apparent commonalities between the logic of his most famous work "Our Enemy, The State", and totally ignoring the first chapter of that book, which elaborates on how that State enabled a pattern of land acquisition that favored the concentration of land in the hands of the wealthy. The fact that Rosen connected Brandeis with Nock was in some ways revolutionary in commentary on Nock, as Brandeis probably had much more in common with Nock than most of his right-wing readers. Clearly, Brandeis has a much better appreciation and understanding of why Nock considered the State to be "Our Enemy" than any of the libertarianish who read him today.
Rosen also spends a good amount of time explaining why Brandeis--a progressive of sorts--was not in favor of centrilized government and thought highly of State and local (as opposed to federal) regulation of commerce. Brandeis was, in essence, trying to make states powerfull enough to successfully regulate the corporations that did business within their jurisdiction. Brandeis further thought that an economic vision of more local production was something to be desired and can generally be considered as "producerist" as opposed to "consumerist".
I was not as excited to read about Brandeis' views on freedom of speech or privacy. It was basically a exposition on the idea that free speach and wide open debate will lead to the rule of reason. I find this to be an excessively rosy picture of human thought and decision making. I found it quite frustrating for Rosen to basically look at these areas as the area of Brandeis' success with a rather quick assumption that his economic policy suggestions could never work. I would have found an exposition on economic liturature, or depate about how well his suggestions on economic policies would actually work in the real world. Brandeis wanted to so regulate competiion that monopoly couldn't exist, as well as generally decrease the size of economic firms for creating many smaller economies as opposed to one national economy. Could this work? What are the consequences? Is anyone persuing this agenda today? These are all excellent questions on what the author could have done, but didn't.
One of the most interesting things about Rosen's work is the discussion of the influence on Brandeis of Albert Jay Nock. This requires some explanation. Albert Jay Nock is an author often used, or more accuratetly misused by right wing conservatives and libertarians. His work can be encountered in the study of William F. Buckley or Murray Rothbard, and in fact Nock is a strong opponent of expansive government. However, a right wing reading of Nock can only be facilitated only by looking for apparent commonalities between the logic of his most famous work "Our Enemy, The State", and totally ignoring the first chapter of that book, which elaborates on how that State enabled a pattern of land acquisition that favored the concentration of land in the hands of the wealthy. The fact that Rosen connected Brandeis with Nock was in some ways revolutionary in commentary on Nock, as Brandeis probably had much more in common with Nock than most of his right-wing readers. Clearly, Brandeis has a much better appreciation and understanding of why Nock considered the State to be "Our Enemy" than any of the libertarianish who read him today.
Rosen also spends a good amount of time explaining why Brandeis--a progressive of sorts--was not in favor of centrilized government and thought highly of State and local (as opposed to federal) regulation of commerce. Brandeis was, in essence, trying to make states powerfull enough to successfully regulate the corporations that did business within their jurisdiction. Brandeis further thought that an economic vision of more local production was something to be desired and can generally be considered as "producerist" as opposed to "consumerist".
I was not as excited to read about Brandeis' views on freedom of speech or privacy. It was basically a exposition on the idea that free speach and wide open debate will lead to the rule of reason. I find this to be an excessively rosy picture of human thought and decision making. I found it quite frustrating for Rosen to basically look at these areas as the area of Brandeis' success with a rather quick assumption that his economic policy suggestions could never work. I would have found an exposition on economic liturature, or depate about how well his suggestions on economic policies would actually work in the real world. Brandeis wanted to so regulate competiion that monopoly couldn't exist, as well as generally decrease the size of economic firms for creating many smaller economies as opposed to one national economy. Could this work? What are the consequences? Is anyone persuing this agenda today? These are all excellent questions on what the author could have done, but didn't.
February 8, 2022
One of the most remembered Supreme Court Justices, and it is easy to see why, people quote and study is Louis D. Brandeis. In this book Jeffrey Rosen studies his writings and influence rather than have this as a regular biography. To me any good justice of the past will have people of all parts of the political spectrum praising that person and it is easy to see why Brandeis' legacy lives on all parts of the spectrum. Brandeis' writings and arguments are some of the best reasoned and written in the Court's history.
It would have been easy for Brandeis to be happy as the first Jewish American on the Court but what got him there was his legal mind. His writing was clear as he wanted his opinions to be read and understood by as many people as possible and not just lawyers. His lack of trust with bigness, whether government or business, makes him a hero to both the right and the left today, yet neither truly followed the path he believed. To Brandeis bigness destroyed liberty and that bigness needed to be regulated or stopped. Rosen does an excellent job of enlightening Brandeis' opinions into the 21st Century and one can see how his legacy still lives in the court today. Especially with the Obamacare ruling that kept the law in place a couple of years ago. That was a Brandeisian decision. Brandeis was concerned with privacy long before the internet and yet seemed to understand that something like the internet was coming and the strength of his philosophy is about privacy.
One of the ways I gained great respect for the justice was that he was the first to use facts and figures in deciding cases and not just talk in legal abstracts. He coined the phrase of 'laboratories of democracy' for the states and was willing to give them large leeway in the laws they created. He was not a justice to get hung up on a poorly worded portion of the law to nullify the entire law. He wanted to understand the purpose of the law and whether that infringed upon people's rights and see what facts and science could tell him about it. He also advocated that the court should decide on the smallest constitutional point possible instead of making grand sweeping changes, something the author points out the current Chief Justice, John Roberts, subscribes to. He wanted as much to be decided in the legislatures and not by judges.
Rosen has written a very readable book about the ideology and influence of Louis D. Brandeis. It helps that he quotes Brandeis a lot but that Brandeis is so readable. This was my first book on this justice and I enjoyed it as a tutorial on some of the legal thinking and concepts that are still in use today.
It would have been easy for Brandeis to be happy as the first Jewish American on the Court but what got him there was his legal mind. His writing was clear as he wanted his opinions to be read and understood by as many people as possible and not just lawyers. His lack of trust with bigness, whether government or business, makes him a hero to both the right and the left today, yet neither truly followed the path he believed. To Brandeis bigness destroyed liberty and that bigness needed to be regulated or stopped. Rosen does an excellent job of enlightening Brandeis' opinions into the 21st Century and one can see how his legacy still lives in the court today. Especially with the Obamacare ruling that kept the law in place a couple of years ago. That was a Brandeisian decision. Brandeis was concerned with privacy long before the internet and yet seemed to understand that something like the internet was coming and the strength of his philosophy is about privacy.
One of the ways I gained great respect for the justice was that he was the first to use facts and figures in deciding cases and not just talk in legal abstracts. He coined the phrase of 'laboratories of democracy' for the states and was willing to give them large leeway in the laws they created. He was not a justice to get hung up on a poorly worded portion of the law to nullify the entire law. He wanted to understand the purpose of the law and whether that infringed upon people's rights and see what facts and science could tell him about it. He also advocated that the court should decide on the smallest constitutional point possible instead of making grand sweeping changes, something the author points out the current Chief Justice, John Roberts, subscribes to. He wanted as much to be decided in the legislatures and not by judges.
Rosen has written a very readable book about the ideology and influence of Louis D. Brandeis. It helps that he quotes Brandeis a lot but that Brandeis is so readable. This was my first book on this justice and I enjoyed it as a tutorial on some of the legal thinking and concepts that are still in use today.
August 29, 2022
As advertised this is a survey of Brandeis’s ideas and not a biography. Not knowing Brandeis well enough to know better it certainly seems like a decent introduction to his work. It has the special strength that Rosen does a good job of trying to apply Brandeis’ thought to the pressent. The framing mechanism for the book, presenting LDB as a mix of Jefferson and Isaiah is a little too convoluted for the short book though.
I came away with the impression that I need to listen to a longer biography of the judge, but not because his ideas were so impressive, but because he had an incredible career as a top judge and lawyer on the biggest economic cases of the so-called “second industrial Revolution”. The constant refrain that he was wary of “bigness” doesn’t seem so deep and inspiring to me as it does to Rosen, but the simple fact that Brandeis made a ton of influential decisions and propagated a ton of ideas through a time of incredible change means he’s someone whose biography you can learn a lot from.
I came away with the impression that I need to listen to a longer biography of the judge, but not because his ideas were so impressive, but because he had an incredible career as a top judge and lawyer on the biggest economic cases of the so-called “second industrial Revolution”. The constant refrain that he was wary of “bigness” doesn’t seem so deep and inspiring to me as it does to Rosen, but the simple fact that Brandeis made a ton of influential decisions and propagated a ton of ideas through a time of incredible change means he’s someone whose biography you can learn a lot from.
January 14, 2022
Justice Louis D. Brandeis has been in the background of several books I’ve read recently, and I stumbled upon this biography on Audible’s included list and thought I’d give it a go. The book itself is relatively short, and I found it an interesting listen despite the heavy amount of philosophical pondering and legal jargon. I was impressed with Brandeis’ commitment to the Zionism movement, despite not being an actively practicing member of Judaism. His commitment to that cause, despite fierce criticism in some Jewish circles, is laudable. I was also impressed with his drive to continually educate himself on a number of topics and his willingness to let his new knowledge shape his views on important issues.
Overall, it was a solid introduction to a man whose legacy has left a lasting impact on America and from whom judges on both sides of the political spectrum can find common ground.
Overall, it was a solid introduction to a man whose legacy has left a lasting impact on America and from whom judges on both sides of the political spectrum can find common ground.
June 14, 2025
1) INFORMED CITIZENTRY. "Like Jefferson he believed the greatest threats to a constitutional democracy was an uneducated citizenry. He believed it could not survive both ignorant and free. He was for limited government that allowed rigorous self-education in order to develop their faculties in order to fully participate in American democracy." - Maybe minorly delusional about the citizenry's propensity to self-inform
2) PRODUCERIST: Brandeis further thought that an economic vision of more local production was something to be desired and can generally be considered as "producers" as opposed to "consumerist" -- WAS IN FAVOR OF PRODUCERS SETTING PRICES FOR RETAILERS. HIGHLY UNPRACTICAL.
3) COINED: “States as the laboratories of Democracy.”
4) MORALIST: But enjoyed his brother's? bourbon
5) Likely pro-Eugenics
6) LEISURE TIME: Leisure is for self-improvement and production, he believed, a concept from which our entertainment-saturated world could learn a great deal.
August 10, 2017
Jeffrey Rosen's excellent personal and intellectual biography of Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis is an accessible and short book that was a great portrait into a life that means so much for today's political situation. Brandeis' "curse of bigness" matters now more than ever, given our current corporate concentration.
His view on the public interest is also instructive:
"'The public interest is made up of a number of things...Namely the interest of the rest of the public, the dealer and his clerks and the producer and his employees.' Brandeis maintained, in other words, that the survival of a variety of competitive small businesses was necessary for the welfare of the entire community. As he concluded, 'we are all part of the public and we must find a rule of law that is consistent with the welfare of all the people.'"
It's a great read.
His view on the public interest is also instructive:
"'The public interest is made up of a number of things...Namely the interest of the rest of the public, the dealer and his clerks and the producer and his employees.' Brandeis maintained, in other words, that the survival of a variety of competitive small businesses was necessary for the welfare of the entire community. As he concluded, 'we are all part of the public and we must find a rule of law that is consistent with the welfare of all the people.'"
It's a great read.
November 18, 2020
This book, Louis D. Brandeis: American Prophet by Jeffrey Rosen is a sprawling, inspiring and somewhat inaccessible and disorganized biography of a great man. I read the book because I have always wanted to know more about the preeminent Supreme Court justice and early Zionist advocate.
I do recommend the book, but it has its drawbacks. Chief among those is its verge into hagiography. The author does point out certain inconsistencies but the praise is somewhat overdone. Clearly Brandeis was a great judge as well as legal philosopher. You should determine for yourself if any man is as great as described.
Note: I was interrupted in reading this book by the loan of several books by a relative. It did not take one month to read.
I do recommend the book, but it has its drawbacks. Chief among those is its verge into hagiography. The author does point out certain inconsistencies but the praise is somewhat overdone. Clearly Brandeis was a great judge as well as legal philosopher. You should determine for yourself if any man is as great as described.
Note: I was interrupted in reading this book by the loan of several books by a relative. It did not take one month to read.
Read
December 8, 2020This biography by Jeffrey Rosen on the United States' first Jewish supreme court justice, Louis Brandeis, introduces us to the justice's early life, and most prominently, his judicial philosophy which had a lasting impact on how lawyers and scholars alike view and interpret the US constitution. We learn about Brandeis' commitment to upholding the first amendment, limiting centralized government control influenced by his admiration for Thomas Jefferson, and his insistence that corporate power be checked by regulation.
June 21, 2022
An excellent condensed biography of Brandeis. Rosen provides far more emphasis on the intellectual developments of Brandeis than the facts of his life, but on reflection that's what I was looking for after all. Brandeis's opinions on centralization (both in government and in business), free speech, privacy, leisure, and Zionism take center stage as the most prescient for our age of information and partisan division. All the subjects covered provide imperative and necessary perspective on issues pertaining to democracy and liberty in the US today.
Many well-written and fascinating biographies purporting to be fair intellectual history inevitably trend dogmatic or polemic. They are toxic fun if you agree with them but usually lose focus and accuracy in favor of passive axe-grinding. Rosen mostly avoids this tendency despite having strong views himself, largely because of the general applicability of Brandeis's beliefs. I'm sure his experience with the NCC plays a part too. Regardless, Brandeis would applaud the notion of a factually rigorous "Brandeis Brief" of his life's work. Even-measured and sparing no criticism, this is the kind of history that informs with purpose and reason.
There are two major highlights that I enjoyed immensely. First was the thread throughout of Brandeis's belief on the use of leisure time. Leisure is for self-improvement and production, he believed, a concept from which our entertainment-saturated world could learn a great deal. I've set some goals myself to engage more as a citizen and read more that is helpful to that end. Secondly is the discussion of the right to privacy. This concerns my professional life, so it makes sense it hits home. But Rosen's treatment of the Olmstead dissent is the rare moment of historical discussion to which every free-thinking individual ought to lend attention. Besides the fun anecdote from an unpublished draft that Brandeis confused television and anticipated actual video calls, the sterling qualities evident in Brandeis's words are on full display. Their urgency for us today is no different. My admiration for this stirring dissent is renewed ten-fold.
Something I didn't expect: Rosen does a satisfying job of rooting the "Jewish Jefferson" within the context of decades of social and constitutional debate, right back to Jefferson himself. Such was the connection that my long-dormant interest in Jefferson and his quixotic, perhaps dandified perspective on American society-as-it-might-have-been, is revitalized.
The world needs more Brandeis, and more debate over his opinions. They provide a far more principled approach to modern social and technological issues than anything I've read since his time--a marvel given what has changed since. That example itself provides a remarkable challenge to us in how we interpret the Constitution, as well as a powerful, even prophetic, guide.
Many well-written and fascinating biographies purporting to be fair intellectual history inevitably trend dogmatic or polemic. They are toxic fun if you agree with them but usually lose focus and accuracy in favor of passive axe-grinding. Rosen mostly avoids this tendency despite having strong views himself, largely because of the general applicability of Brandeis's beliefs. I'm sure his experience with the NCC plays a part too. Regardless, Brandeis would applaud the notion of a factually rigorous "Brandeis Brief" of his life's work. Even-measured and sparing no criticism, this is the kind of history that informs with purpose and reason.
There are two major highlights that I enjoyed immensely. First was the thread throughout of Brandeis's belief on the use of leisure time. Leisure is for self-improvement and production, he believed, a concept from which our entertainment-saturated world could learn a great deal. I've set some goals myself to engage more as a citizen and read more that is helpful to that end. Secondly is the discussion of the right to privacy. This concerns my professional life, so it makes sense it hits home. But Rosen's treatment of the Olmstead dissent is the rare moment of historical discussion to which every free-thinking individual ought to lend attention. Besides the fun anecdote from an unpublished draft that Brandeis confused television and anticipated actual video calls, the sterling qualities evident in Brandeis's words are on full display. Their urgency for us today is no different. My admiration for this stirring dissent is renewed ten-fold.
Something I didn't expect: Rosen does a satisfying job of rooting the "Jewish Jefferson" within the context of decades of social and constitutional debate, right back to Jefferson himself. Such was the connection that my long-dormant interest in Jefferson and his quixotic, perhaps dandified perspective on American society-as-it-might-have-been, is revitalized.
The world needs more Brandeis, and more debate over his opinions. They provide a far more principled approach to modern social and technological issues than anything I've read since his time--a marvel given what has changed since. That example itself provides a remarkable challenge to us in how we interpret the Constitution, as well as a powerful, even prophetic, guide.
August 19, 2018
Though he be termed a progressive, Brandeis has much to offer people of all political and legal persuasions. Conservatives would appreciate his advocacy for broad freedom of speech as well general distaste for big government, though may be taken aback by his solutions to the curse of bigness. Brandeis is a complicated yet still a very relevant figure to modern issues, and this nuanced book is useful for seeing how his views fit into today's society.
February 7, 2017
An excellent introduction, not just to Brandeis, but to a different way of thinking about politics. Less of a focus on left/right and a much greater focus on liberty and how scale threatens it. Both big government and big business threaten local economies and our freedom. Brandeis is a remarkable man and Rosen makes a compelling case that Americans desperately need to be reacquainted with him.
November 29, 2022
Though the content was interesting, the writing style didn’t grab my attention. The author seems to excuse away the subjects flaws and seems overzealous in crediting accomplishments to the Brandeis without much evidence to back it up. All-in-all, the book provided a pleasant overview of Brandeis and his times and enlightens the reader to his judicial philosophy.
January 7, 2023
Too much legal theory and philosophy for me. One interesting chapter about his role in American Zionist movement. Not really his personal story. Not much about the important cases he pursued as a lawyer. Final chapter speculates how he would react to modern issues of privacy and other topics, again, not for the average reader.
June 12, 2018
3.5 stars. I thoroughly enjoyed the first half of the book which was focused on his legal career, constitutional beliefs, etc. The Zionist portion of the book dragged for me. I was re-engaged during the epilogue. Fascinating man...could use him right now, I think....
July 16, 2020
4.5 stars. Really neat insights and a great epilogue. I like how short this book is. Basically a highlight real of Brandeis’s personality and vision without all the niceties a full biography requires. A great first read into the man.
January 7, 2023
Well written account of a great jurist through his most important decisions and causes. The account is also well balanced, showing some of the warts in addition to the heroic. Fascinating to read about in this time when his thoughts on privacy are being challenged.
July 19, 2023
A good primer on the thought and impact of Louis Brandeis, a true giant of the 20th Century. It should be said, however, that this is an intellectual biography, not much on his personal life or political relationships. Listened to the audiobook.
September 25, 2025
Inspiring account of a remarkable man. This really helped me develop some opinions on economic issues I've always felt out of my depth on. I finished this with a feeling that Brandeis is a must-know for anyone wanting to make a positive impact in a legal career.
December 20, 2025
come for the privacy, puke for the zionism.
the book itself is pretty good in terms of going through brandeis’ positions and but the the unquestioning support of israel (which yes, i know this is a jewish series) made me trust all of it less.
the book itself is pretty good in terms of going through brandeis’ positions and but the the unquestioning support of israel (which yes, i know this is a jewish series) made me trust all of it less.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews