Constitutional Law

by Erwin Chemerinsky

A leading fifth edition text by a prominent scholar, Constitutional Law, is known for its concise, yet comprehensive presentation. Professor Chemerinsky’s distinctive approach presents the law solely through case excerpts and his own essays, and with the author’s context and background information, the law becomes more readily understood. The text’s flexible organization accommodates a variety of course structures so that no chapter assumes that students have read preceding material. Finally, a complete Teacher's Manual and Annual Case Supplement round out this acclaimed Constitutional Law text.

Features:

Comprehensive coverage; accessible writing style Distinctive approach presents the law solely through case excerpts and author-written essays Provides context and background information Flexible organization—no chapter assumes that students have read other chapters Updated throughout; includes major new cases 

Genres: Law, Textbooks

1958 pages, Kindle Edition

Published December 31, 2016

Reviews

[Mackenzie Blackwell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Will be updated this review after I hear his keynote speech. Would be four stars but, not when it costs $500

[Alyssa Hurt · Rating 1 out of 5]

This one really made me want to cry the whole time

[Andrew Yuan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The framers of our Constitution truly outdid themselves. This casebook is an excellent overview of the first three articles of the Constitution.

No one could find themselves agreeing with every decision here, but everyone who reads this will be in awe of the genius that went into the pillars of American Democracy.

[Eve · Rating 2 out of 5]

What I learned in Con Law this semester: the Supreme Court loves to be silly and flip a coin when deciding cases

[Kaylen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Actually really enjoyed the way this textbook was set up and the expansions on all of the cases. Interested to see how the next edition will handle the fundamental right to an abortion section seeing as the edition I read was published pre-Dobbs.

#riproe :'(

[zee]

took the final today. tears.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Small rant: I found the ordering of the cases very annoying. I understand that it was aimed at providing perspective on the rules in certain ways, but a straight up chronological approach would have helped me see the evolution of the rule easier. I ended up reordering all my briefs not in the book's order, but in chronological order so as to see the picture more clearly.

[Sara Rutherford · Rating 1 out of 5]

Forced to read against my own will. Boring asf. Never understood a damn thing. Absolutely no plot line, zero character development.

[W · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why can't we all be framers and just get along? 😣

Agree or disagree with him, Scalia's got those judicial bars: "That is what this suit is about. Power. The allocation of power among Congress, the President, and the courts . . . Frequently an issue of this sort will come before the Court clad, so to speak, in sheep’s clothing . . . But this wolf comes as a wolf." Morrison v. Olson.

[McKenna · Rating 1 out of 5]

Listen I LOVE con law. It’s one of my favorites. But the book brings up cases not in chronological time line order WITHIN the certain subtopic. That just pisses me off. You just bounce around learning about the lochner era and it’s effect but not linearly. Who tf thought that was swaggy? Grow up. But the numbers back in order fr.

[Cristina · Rating 5 out of 5]

This textbook is well organized, which makes it easy to pinpoint the takeaways from each case. Highly recommend Chemerinsky’s supplement as well.

[Heather · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is THICK. And my professor had us read nearly the entire thing in one semester. It does have the most important cases without a lot of fluff.

[Angie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I loved what I learned about the constitution

[Emma Wallace · Rating 1 out of 5]

Sure to induce panic

[Allison Carr · Rating 4 out of 5]

chemerinsky u mad lad!! overall fine except for the back problems I got from carrying this beast around.

[Xonzy Gaddis · Rating 3 out of 5]

The thickest of opinions…

[Madison Ritsema · Rating 3 out of 5]

big ass book

[Victoria]

I did not actually read the whole thing but most of it for constitutional law. It is a decent textbook.

[Carlos Yang · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderful work of fiction.

[Sherry Necessary · Rating 1 out of 5]

Crazy how I wanted to cry this whole time but now I’m done

[Nat]

again, i deserve for this book to count

[amna (taylor’s version) · Rating 2 out of 5]

read every case very begrudgingly out of fear of getting cold called. racist slave owner’s opinions do not matter much to me btw but i’m glad amendments exist

[Jourden Unsell]

goodbye constitutional law, coming to a first amendment classroom near you next spring!

[Danny · Rating 3 out of 5]

1. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 US 570 (2008)
2. Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)
3. Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962)
4. Rucho v. Common Cause, 139 S.Ct. 2484 (2019)
5. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952)
6. United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 US 304 (1936)
7. Boumediene v. Bush, 553 US 723 (2008)
8. Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392 (2018)
9. Trump v. Vance, 140 S. Ct. 2412 (2020)
10. Trump v. Mazars USA, 140 S. Ct. 2019 (2020)
11. McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
12. Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 US 1 (1824)
13. NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 US 1 (1937)
14. U.S. v. Darby, 312 US 100 (1941)
15. Wickard v. Filburn, 317 US 111 (1942)
16. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. US, 379 US 241 (1964)
17. Katzenbach v. McClung, Sr. & McClung Jr., 379 US 294 (1964)
18. US v. Lopez, 541 US 549 (1995)
19. US v. Morrison, 529 US 598 (2000)
20. Gonzales v. Raich, 545 US 1 (2005)
21. New York v. US, 505 US 144 (1992)
22. Printz v. US, 521 US 898 (1997)
23. Reno v. Condon, 528 US 141 (2000)
24. Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 138 S. Ct. 1461 (2018)
25. National Federation of Ind. Business v. Sebelius, 567 US 519 (2012)
26. US v. Morrison, 529 US 598 (2000)
27. Katzenbach v. Morgan & Morgan, 348 US 641 (1966)
28. City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 US 507 (1997)
29. Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 570 US 529 (2013)
30. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (1896)
31. Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 32 US 243 (1833)
32. Slaughter House Cases, 8 US 36 (1872)
33. Saenz v. Roe, 526 US 489 (1999)
34. McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 US 742 (2010)
35. Timbs v. Indiana, 139 S. Ct. 682 (2019)
36. Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US 393 (1857)
37. Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York, 336 US 106 (1949)
38. New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer, 440 US 568 (1979)
39. City of Cleburne, Texas v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc., 473 US 432 (1985)
40. Korematsu v. US, 323 US 214 (1944)
41. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)
42. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 355 US 701 (2007)
43. Civil Rights Cases, 109 US 3 (1883)
44. Marsh v. Alabama, 326 US 501 (1946)
45. Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 US 345 (1974)
46. Manhattan Community Access Corporation v. Halleck, 139 S. Ct. 1921 (2019)
47. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 US 1 (1948)
48. Deshaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 US 189 (1989)
49. Washington v. Davis, 426 US 229 (1976)
50. McClesky v. Kemp, 481 US 279 (1987)
51. City of Mobile v. Bolden, 446 US 55 (1980)
52. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 306 (2003)
53. Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 US 244 (2003)
54. Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 136 S. Ct. 2196 (2016)
55. Craig v. Boren, 429 US 190 (1976)
56. US v. Virginia, 518 US 515 (1996)
57. Geduldig v. Aiello, 417 US 484 (1974)
58. Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, 450 US 464 (1981)
59. Nguyen v. INS, 533 US 53 (2001)
60. Romer v. Evans, 517 US 620 (1996)
61. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 US 558 (2003)
62. Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015)
63. Brandt v. Rutledge, Arkansas (2021)
64. West Virginia BOE v. BPJ, West Virginia (2023)
65. Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 US 578 (1897)
66. Lochner v. NY, 198 US 45 (1905)
67. West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 US 379 (1937)
68. US v. Carolene Products Co., 304 US 144 (1938)
69. Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc., 348 US 483 (1955)
70. Buck v. Bell, 274 US 200 (1927)
71. Skinner v. Oklahoma Ex Rel. Williamson, 316 US 535 (1942)
72. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965)
73. Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 US 438 (1972)
74. Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)
75. Planned Parenthood v. Casey I, 505 US 833 (1992)
76. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022)

[Callista · Rating 2 out of 5]

Marking this as currently reading because I had to read parts of it for my Con law class this last semester, and I have to read more of it next semester during my First Amendment class. Not having a good time with it.