What do you think?
Rate this book
The U.S. Constitution: Explained--Clause by Clause--for Every American Today
Politicians come and go, but the Constitution stands as the supreme law of the land. Setting forth the workings of our democracy, it is the bedrock document from which we derive our policies on topics as diverse and galvanizing as immigration, gun ownership, voting rights, taxation, policing, civil liberties, and war.
In this indispensable edition, acclaimed historian and Constitutional expert Ray Raphael guides us through the origins, impact, and current relevance of the original text and all twenty-seven amendments. Here is the key historical context for issues in the news today—from the Electoral College to Washington gridlock, from peaceful protests to executive power. Thoughtful and nuanced, lively and highly readable, this annotated Constitution is for all of us to read and refer to—the ultimate political fact-checking source for every American.
In this indispensable edition, acclaimed historian and Constitutional expert Ray Raphael guides us through the origins, impact, and current relevance of the original text and all twenty-seven amendments. Here is the key historical context for issues in the news today—from the Electoral College to Washington gridlock, from peaceful protests to executive power. Thoughtful and nuanced, lively and highly readable, this annotated Constitution is for all of us to read and refer to—the ultimate political fact-checking source for every American.
192 pages, Paperback
Published October 31, 2017
199 people are currently reading
331 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 - 27 of 27 reviews
March 30, 2024
For anyone who wants to read the U.S. Constitution and have historical context this is an easy and informative read. The explanations do not get into the weeds but for someone who hasn’t read other books dealing with this subject or during the era of the framers, it has shown a light on what is great and lacking in this document in a concise way.
January 26, 2025
Easy 5/5 and something I think EVERY citizen of the U.S. should read. About two years ago, I acquired and read a copy of the constitution, but we should know by now that old English and wordy documents don’t translate well for the average 21st century layman, myself included. This review is going to look a little different than my usual, as it’s less going to describe the book itself and more describe my general outlook, because I think it’s pretty obvious that Ray Raphael simply did exactly what the title says: explained the U.S. Constitution and Amendments clause by clause.
First and foremost, I love this author, and he’s easily my favorite U.S. historian. I will admit, in some ways this did give me a slight appreciation for the framers (“founding fathers” to the constitution cucks) that I didn’t think I’d have before. I think seeing the way of thinking being broken down for a time over two centuries ago makes it worth acknowledging how progressive this was for the time (even though we’re all pretty aware that I could spit out a plethora of problems, too). I do find it fascinating that despite this being drafted by a bunch of large-property owning colonists, this doesn’t explicitly state one economic model, which gives me some firepower towards those that think capitalism = freedom; it doesn’t, and it didn’t in 1787, either.
However, it also confirmed what I already knew about republics, as someone who identifies with the original definition of a republican (not the reactionary garbage and ass-backwardness that modern U.S. republicans absolve). Any government, constitutional republic or not, is authoritarian, and the government as an evil institution is pretty crushed here; meaning, I always found it odd that everyone who seems to hate any form of government are usually the quickest to die on the hill of the framers. Words like that get thrown at any nation-state that opposes our narratives, be it Nazi Germany, North Korea, or Canada. The U.S. is, and always has been as authoritarian as the USSR, China, or Franco’s Spain. It all boils down to what’s considered acceptable by the people in any given time or place, which Ray Raphael is great at pointing out. It’s also an indicator of the level of authoritarian measures any government will resort to, depending how secure or insecure a state is. Prohibition is the easiest thing to point to; is banning alcohol in a country where that’s a cultural norm for 14 years in the early 20th century any different from the Soviet ban of western music? Again, people on either side of that equation may let their biases dictate one thing or another, but I’d like to believe I’m a little more forward thinking than that; to me the answer is an obvious no. That’s why we have speakeasies in every boujee as brewer in US cities, and why you can find bootleg copies of Alice Cooper tapes still being sold in Romania. We could point to why this country or that country is worse or not for days based off of governmental actions, but that would be a waste of time.
Further examination is required. First, it begs the question; why does it matter? Well, to an extent, it sometimes doesn’t. Raphael did good in showing the vagueness of some clauses and interpretations over time that have led to conflict since the beginning of the U.S. as a nation. Hot button ones around the first two amendments on speech and gun ownership are easy ones, but at the end of the day, a constitutional document is only as good as those who enforce it (or not), which has changed drastically depending where and when. As an extreme example, we can look to North Korea’s constitutional right of the freedom of religious practice. That must mean there are flourishing churches and religious communities without any repression of Christians in North Korea, right? (and I point out this explicit example as someone who plays devils advocate for the DPRK sometimes).
The point here is, and Raphael concludes with, is that a lot of these things speak to the power of the working population. We can respect the framers and different political leaders without lending too much credit to them, or without seeing this as an infalible document that’s holy and sacred. The reconstruction amendments were, in theory, built to give black men the power to vote (note: women couldn’t vote for another half century), but in practice this took a lot of popular push to make a reality, as grandfather clauses and strange technicalities didn’t make this so. Hell, we have a current sitting president looking to sign executive orders to UNDO several amendments that are considered constitutional, with imperial endeavors of land acquisition that many a citizen are finding ways to defend, despite their actual beliefs. What exactly can we, in our bastion of freedom, do? That’s up to you. No matter how much you may like one’s establishment, a true progressive is always pushing for something better, and I hold myself accountable in this regard when discussing socialist governments and all their flaws. I may hold Lenin in a high regard, but I’d never in a million years state that his policies in the early 1920s is something we should implement here, as that would be dogmatic and irresponsible. As an USAmerican, I should be taking what I like about Washington or Lenin alike and deciding what can be made better, and this book helped me largely with the former.
Unfortunately, these days we have many U.S. citizens applying the reactionary train of thought; a return to an alleged golden age that once was, rather than springing forward to what has yet to be. This book outlined the importance of the document and its amendments, while downplaying it at the same time. It often criticizes those who look to this as if it’s a holy text, those who incorrectly use it to defend their narrative (second amendment being a HUGE one), and more importantly, pointed out that most who love the constitution often are referring to the Bill of Rights and the following amendments, as all their constitution itself did was outline the government as an institution; the “checks and balances” if you will. I encourage everyone reading this review to read this book. It gives a beautiful description for a strong understanding of what our nation was built on without too much of a bias, and includes examples of certain problems that arose from it throughout history, everywhere from the dispute over Federalist and Republican Party feuds in the 18th century, to scandals in the 2016 election and everything in between. Always look forward for something better, never backwards for something that’s been idealized.
First and foremost, I love this author, and he’s easily my favorite U.S. historian. I will admit, in some ways this did give me a slight appreciation for the framers (“founding fathers” to the constitution cucks) that I didn’t think I’d have before. I think seeing the way of thinking being broken down for a time over two centuries ago makes it worth acknowledging how progressive this was for the time (even though we’re all pretty aware that I could spit out a plethora of problems, too). I do find it fascinating that despite this being drafted by a bunch of large-property owning colonists, this doesn’t explicitly state one economic model, which gives me some firepower towards those that think capitalism = freedom; it doesn’t, and it didn’t in 1787, either.
However, it also confirmed what I already knew about republics, as someone who identifies with the original definition of a republican (not the reactionary garbage and ass-backwardness that modern U.S. republicans absolve). Any government, constitutional republic or not, is authoritarian, and the government as an evil institution is pretty crushed here; meaning, I always found it odd that everyone who seems to hate any form of government are usually the quickest to die on the hill of the framers. Words like that get thrown at any nation-state that opposes our narratives, be it Nazi Germany, North Korea, or Canada. The U.S. is, and always has been as authoritarian as the USSR, China, or Franco’s Spain. It all boils down to what’s considered acceptable by the people in any given time or place, which Ray Raphael is great at pointing out. It’s also an indicator of the level of authoritarian measures any government will resort to, depending how secure or insecure a state is. Prohibition is the easiest thing to point to; is banning alcohol in a country where that’s a cultural norm for 14 years in the early 20th century any different from the Soviet ban of western music? Again, people on either side of that equation may let their biases dictate one thing or another, but I’d like to believe I’m a little more forward thinking than that; to me the answer is an obvious no. That’s why we have speakeasies in every boujee as brewer in US cities, and why you can find bootleg copies of Alice Cooper tapes still being sold in Romania. We could point to why this country or that country is worse or not for days based off of governmental actions, but that would be a waste of time.
Further examination is required. First, it begs the question; why does it matter? Well, to an extent, it sometimes doesn’t. Raphael did good in showing the vagueness of some clauses and interpretations over time that have led to conflict since the beginning of the U.S. as a nation. Hot button ones around the first two amendments on speech and gun ownership are easy ones, but at the end of the day, a constitutional document is only as good as those who enforce it (or not), which has changed drastically depending where and when. As an extreme example, we can look to North Korea’s constitutional right of the freedom of religious practice. That must mean there are flourishing churches and religious communities without any repression of Christians in North Korea, right? (and I point out this explicit example as someone who plays devils advocate for the DPRK sometimes).
The point here is, and Raphael concludes with, is that a lot of these things speak to the power of the working population. We can respect the framers and different political leaders without lending too much credit to them, or without seeing this as an infalible document that’s holy and sacred. The reconstruction amendments were, in theory, built to give black men the power to vote (note: women couldn’t vote for another half century), but in practice this took a lot of popular push to make a reality, as grandfather clauses and strange technicalities didn’t make this so. Hell, we have a current sitting president looking to sign executive orders to UNDO several amendments that are considered constitutional, with imperial endeavors of land acquisition that many a citizen are finding ways to defend, despite their actual beliefs. What exactly can we, in our bastion of freedom, do? That’s up to you. No matter how much you may like one’s establishment, a true progressive is always pushing for something better, and I hold myself accountable in this regard when discussing socialist governments and all their flaws. I may hold Lenin in a high regard, but I’d never in a million years state that his policies in the early 1920s is something we should implement here, as that would be dogmatic and irresponsible. As an USAmerican, I should be taking what I like about Washington or Lenin alike and deciding what can be made better, and this book helped me largely with the former.
Unfortunately, these days we have many U.S. citizens applying the reactionary train of thought; a return to an alleged golden age that once was, rather than springing forward to what has yet to be. This book outlined the importance of the document and its amendments, while downplaying it at the same time. It often criticizes those who look to this as if it’s a holy text, those who incorrectly use it to defend their narrative (second amendment being a HUGE one), and more importantly, pointed out that most who love the constitution often are referring to the Bill of Rights and the following amendments, as all their constitution itself did was outline the government as an institution; the “checks and balances” if you will. I encourage everyone reading this review to read this book. It gives a beautiful description for a strong understanding of what our nation was built on without too much of a bias, and includes examples of certain problems that arose from it throughout history, everywhere from the dispute over Federalist and Republican Party feuds in the 18th century, to scandals in the 2016 election and everything in between. Always look forward for something better, never backwards for something that’s been idealized.
July 19, 2018
Reading the Constitution should be required reading, of course, but so too should be some sort of document that provides context for each part of the Constitution's rendering; it's clear that many Americans have memories that are short or either inactive due to an ignorance of history.
Of course, there were, "Ah, yeah, I remember that now" moments for me, but I also had some new thoughts or ideas after reading the Constitution in full. One thing that has struck me is my reading of the Seventeenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913. This Amendment declares that the people, rather than state legislatures, should elect U.S. Senators. The development and ultimate ratification of this Amendment was due to public outcry regarding the state legislature's control of choosing Senators - there was nothing stopping money and undue influence from directing state legislatures from selecting senators that would benefit those interests. As a result, the people now choose our Senators. While I know money doesn't directly influence the American electorate in the same way (i.e. American citizens do not receive some sort of quid pro quo for voting for candidates), we have to see that money constrains the activity of Senators in similar ways that might have occurred should the legislature have continued to choose Representatives. I know this isn't a logically analogous argument, but there is certainly a connection there.
Of course, there were, "Ah, yeah, I remember that now" moments for me, but I also had some new thoughts or ideas after reading the Constitution in full. One thing that has struck me is my reading of the Seventeenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913. This Amendment declares that the people, rather than state legislatures, should elect U.S. Senators. The development and ultimate ratification of this Amendment was due to public outcry regarding the state legislature's control of choosing Senators - there was nothing stopping money and undue influence from directing state legislatures from selecting senators that would benefit those interests. As a result, the people now choose our Senators. While I know money doesn't directly influence the American electorate in the same way (i.e. American citizens do not receive some sort of quid pro quo for voting for candidates), we have to see that money constrains the activity of Senators in similar ways that might have occurred should the legislature have continued to choose Representatives. I know this isn't a logically analogous argument, but there is certainly a connection there.
September 17, 2020
Fantastic. Goes through the Constitution and Bill of Rights section by section, explaining the language, history behind ratification, how the sections and amendments have been used throughout our history in the courts and Congress, and relates sections to events of the last fifty years that we can all relate to and understand even better now.
I was pleasantly surprised by the non-partisanship of it and the author’s academic background as a historian reassured me I was getting historically accurate information and not some politicized nonsense from a layman.
I was pleasantly surprised by the non-partisanship of it and the author’s academic background as a historian reassured me I was getting historically accurate information and not some politicized nonsense from a layman.
May 25, 2025
Physically read. This little book is an informative and enjoyable read.
December 8, 2018
This is a useful book. It’s quick and clear, and though some of the author’s own views do seep in a bit here and there, it does a good job of explaining in modern non-legal language what each section of the Constitution means. Highly recommended.
February 8, 2019
A seminal guide to the United States Constitution. It helps to grasp a fuller compression of the source material while understanding the meaning behind each clause. A definite must have.
February 5, 2024
Feeling educated🤓 boring read.
December 20, 2025
The U.S. Constitution is to American citizens as the Church-Turing Thesis is to computer scientists or The Prince is to political scientists. As in, you probably see references to it all the time, it's a foundational text that everyone should read, but how many people do you know have actually read the whole thing. Well, it turns out you can read through the entire U.S. Constitution (along with very useful explanations) in just one public transit round-trip from Baldwin Park to LAX.
Not only is it important, but it's surprisingly enjoyable compared to when I first learned about constitutional law. This edition provides the historical contexts underpinning the ideation, implementations, and interpretations for the various clauses. It reminded of how revolutionary the creation of the United States was (a transition from feudalism to capitalism) and how difficult it is to design and implement an effective government.
Not only is it important, but it's surprisingly enjoyable compared to when I first learned about constitutional law. This edition provides the historical contexts underpinning the ideation, implementations, and interpretations for the various clauses. It reminded of how revolutionary the creation of the United States was (a transition from feudalism to capitalism) and how difficult it is to design and implement an effective government.
August 25, 2020
This is an instructive and important annotation of THE founding document of American government. Anyone hoping for a proof text for their outlook will be disappointed. But what one will find is an edition that places the document in historical context while outlining its intentions and limitations. The final paragraph perhaps sums it up best (italics are the author's).
"Nobody ever said drafting a constitution would be easy, and interpreting the United States Constitution can yet more difficult. Debates are inevitable, and user discretion is always advised. But as we ponder this section or that, we should never lose sight of the Constitution's overarching purpose: to establish a workable government that meets the people's needs. Attempts to subvert the very idea of government in the name of the Constitution are, in spirit, unconstitutional."
"Nobody ever said drafting a constitution would be easy, and interpreting the United States Constitution can yet more difficult. Debates are inevitable, and user discretion is always advised. But as we ponder this section or that, we should never lose sight of the Constitution's overarching purpose: to establish a workable government that meets the people's needs. Attempts to subvert the very idea of government in the name of the Constitution are, in spirit, unconstitutional."
June 2, 2025
179 pages. Concise, clear, quick and straightforward, this is the one book every American should read. It lays out the essence of our form of government whose structure is dictated and governed by our Constitution.
All the struggles and anguish and triumph of America since 1789 are found within this document and to read the old words explained in such brevity and wisdom is quite remarkable.
Essential for everyone who loves America and just as important for those who fear that our experiment in self-governance is frail and dying. To read this book gave me a refresher and a jolt of optimism for "e pluribus unum."
All the struggles and anguish and triumph of America since 1789 are found within this document and to read the old words explained in such brevity and wisdom is quite remarkable.
Essential for everyone who loves America and just as important for those who fear that our experiment in self-governance is frail and dying. To read this book gave me a refresher and a jolt of optimism for "e pluribus unum."
January 3, 2019
This is a great read and an even greater reference book. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are examined article by article with numerous historical references to show how we have went from the original intent of each Article to how it is interpreted today. There is no liberal or conservative spin here just an easy to understand commentary that will benefit every reader no matter what political vector they come to this book with.
July 13, 2024
Excellent book. Very well done. The author still uses some words that may have to be looked up, but does a great job of giving a plain language interpretation, or translation, of this 248 year old document. He offers no judgements, just explanations. That language evolves over two and a half centuries is very evident. I highly recommend this book for every American.
December 15, 2025
Raphael does an excellent job breaking down each component of the Constitution and explaining the pertinent history behind them. This is essential reader for any student of American history, politics, or self-respecting civics nerd.
October 28, 2018
Clear explanations of and context for Constitution and Bill of Rights.
January 25, 2020
Very insightful and easy to understand.
February 1, 2020
Really great accompanying text
August 20, 2020
I liked it. Gave me a lot to think about in regards to ideas originally put forth by the founding fathers.
January 18, 2021
Simply explained with no political leanings. It was refreshing to read
Read
May 4, 2023Worth a read
Concise and to the point. Exactly what I was looking for. I can't post this review without more words so here they are. I said what needed to be said.
Concise and to the point. Exactly what I was looking for. I can't post this review without more words so here they are. I said what needed to be said.
Read
March 9, 2024Don’t ask
July 25, 2024
Gave me a keener understanding of our great United States Constitution.
May 25, 2025
The Constitution and Amendments were explained excellently.
September 8, 2025
Could use some improvements...
February 2, 2023
This book, as the title says, explains the U.S. Constitution in an easy-to-understand way. I didn't enjoy reading this book mostly but I see value in it and I think that the author did a good job.
May 21, 2023
An easy-to-read and short history of interpretations of the text of the constitution. I thought the author did a fairly good job of explaining both sides of controversies and rendering the current interpretation in plain English where it is not controversial.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews