What do you think?
Rate this book
Law in America: A Short History
Throughout America’s history, our laws have been a reflection of who we are, of what we value, of who has control. They embody our society’s genetic code. In the masterful hands of the subject’s greatest living historian, the story of the evolution of our laws serves to lay bare the deciding struggles over power and justice that have shaped this country from its birth pangs to the present. Law in America is a supreme example of the historian’s art, its brevity a testament to the great elegance and wit of its composition.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
30 people are currently reading
412 people want to read
About the author
Lawrence M. Friedman
69 books27 followersProfessor of law.
Also author of mystery novels, The Frank May Chronicles.
Also author of mystery novels, The Frank May Chronicles.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
August 29, 2019
The national government was like the brain of a dinosaur: an insignificant mass of neurons inside a gigantic body.
It was pretty great. I was almost surprised how much information can be stuffed in such a short book. I'll definitely read more from Lawrence Friedman in the future. And if you are looking for a book that gives you an overview of the evolution of the American Law, definitely pick up this one!
The most memorable information from this book? That you can import an ostrich under 36 inches in height or/and 30 pounds in weight without having it inspected by a veterinarian.
Though, I have to take one star down because I fell asleep while reading the part about marriage.
It was pretty great. I was almost surprised how much information can be stuffed in such a short book. I'll definitely read more from Lawrence Friedman in the future. And if you are looking for a book that gives you an overview of the evolution of the American Law, definitely pick up this one!
The most memorable information from this book? That you can import an ostrich under 36 inches in height or/and 30 pounds in weight without having it inspected by a veterinarian.
Though, I have to take one star down because I fell asleep while reading the part about marriage.
October 14, 2025
A Study Of The Nature Of American Law
Professor Lawrence Friedman's book is subtitled "A Short History" of American Law. The book does indeed take a historical approach, but its subject is more the nature of American law than its detailed history. Professor Friedman describes how our law has become what it is and the sources of change in the law.
The theme of his book is that law follows social and economic changes. It responds to the needs that people in society assert. At the beginning of the 21st Century, we live in a large, pluralistic, technologically complex, impersonal and interdependent country. We are all dependent upon the actions of other people whom we don't know and don't control to meet even the most basic needs of our daily lives. The growing complexity and bulk of our laws, in economic relations, family law, criminal law and much else changes in response to social needs and mores. In addition, there has been a move towards centralization -- for people to look to the Federal government as a source of law and as an aggressive participant in social change and in the satisfaction of needs.
Given his basic claim that law follows society, Professor Friedman provides a short, useful, overview of law in the colonial period pointing out how societies were smaller, more homogeneous in terms of culture and religion and more able to use more intimate, so to speak, forms of social control than those available to the current administrative state. He follows this with a good discussion of law and economics which suggests how and why the focus of tort law has changed from protecting growing business to protecting workers. A section on family law explores the effect of changing sexual mores, among other matters, on the nature of law. There is a discussion of the changing nature of race relations and of the role of the modern large welfare state.
The book is clearly written. It is thoughtful and provocative in that Professor Friedman sets out a thesis and proceeds to expound and defend it in his exposition of American law. His book is not and does not purport to be a full, complete treatment of American legal history. It is possible too that the nature of legal change and the interrelationship between law and social change is more complex and multi-layered than the book takes it to be. This book is a short, good introduction to American law which should stimulate the reader in his or her own thinking.
Robin Friedman
Professor Lawrence Friedman's book is subtitled "A Short History" of American Law. The book does indeed take a historical approach, but its subject is more the nature of American law than its detailed history. Professor Friedman describes how our law has become what it is and the sources of change in the law.
The theme of his book is that law follows social and economic changes. It responds to the needs that people in society assert. At the beginning of the 21st Century, we live in a large, pluralistic, technologically complex, impersonal and interdependent country. We are all dependent upon the actions of other people whom we don't know and don't control to meet even the most basic needs of our daily lives. The growing complexity and bulk of our laws, in economic relations, family law, criminal law and much else changes in response to social needs and mores. In addition, there has been a move towards centralization -- for people to look to the Federal government as a source of law and as an aggressive participant in social change and in the satisfaction of needs.
Given his basic claim that law follows society, Professor Friedman provides a short, useful, overview of law in the colonial period pointing out how societies were smaller, more homogeneous in terms of culture and religion and more able to use more intimate, so to speak, forms of social control than those available to the current administrative state. He follows this with a good discussion of law and economics which suggests how and why the focus of tort law has changed from protecting growing business to protecting workers. A section on family law explores the effect of changing sexual mores, among other matters, on the nature of law. There is a discussion of the changing nature of race relations and of the role of the modern large welfare state.
The book is clearly written. It is thoughtful and provocative in that Professor Friedman sets out a thesis and proceeds to expound and defend it in his exposition of American law. His book is not and does not purport to be a full, complete treatment of American legal history. It is possible too that the nature of legal change and the interrelationship between law and social change is more complex and multi-layered than the book takes it to be. This book is a short, good introduction to American law which should stimulate the reader in his or her own thinking.
Robin Friedman
April 5, 2023
I picked this up as something of a primer before a deeper dive into American legal history, and, while its brevity is appreciated, it was really rather unsatisfying as a whole. Prof. Friedman is able and fluent at tracing legal development, but I never found his social commentary to be insightful in discussing why the law moved the way it did. In particular, there is something of a handwaving around the actual crimes committed by individuals in favor of discussing rehabilitative justice throughout much the section of crime and punishment. Prof. Friedman is also something bordering on obsessive with race, save for where it would prove to be inopportune to discuss, see his discussions of Furman v. Georgia versus Gregg v. Georgia, for instance, as compared to the death penalty broadly.
Most egregious, however, is at least one basic error. As written, regarding Loving v. Virginia, "Loving was a black man who had married a white woman: the ultimate offense to white supremacy" (p. 143). Richard Loving was, of course, a white man who had married a woman of mixed Native and black heritage; it is surprising to me that a leading legal scholar and the number of editors this must have gone through didn't catch this. As I am not an expert, the failure to rectify this error calls into question much of the veracity of the rest of the text to me.
I do not know what alternative texts exist, but I couldn't recommend this in good conscience.
Most egregious, however, is at least one basic error. As written, regarding Loving v. Virginia, "Loving was a black man who had married a white woman: the ultimate offense to white supremacy" (p. 143). Richard Loving was, of course, a white man who had married a woman of mixed Native and black heritage; it is surprising to me that a leading legal scholar and the number of editors this must have gone through didn't catch this. As I am not an expert, the failure to rectify this error calls into question much of the veracity of the rest of the text to me.
I do not know what alternative texts exist, but I couldn't recommend this in good conscience.
July 17, 2009
A highly readable, very short introduction to the American legal system. Touches on historical transformations of criminal law, civil rights, family law, federal powers, & more. Engaging writing and choice anecdotes give muscle to what could have been a vague summary. For example, Friedman's description of women's rights as wives at the turn of the 19th century: "Husband and wife were, as the saying went, one flesh; but the husband was very definitely in charge of that flesh. And more than the flesh. The wife had, in many ways, as few rights as a newborn baby or a lunatic" (59).
February 6, 2013
Short on history, long on opinion. Most times more of an essay than a history.
August 22, 2024
This book delivers what it promises with concision and style. It is a pithy overview of the development of core areas of law from the colonial period to the turn of the 21st century, and indirectly provides a roadmap to American government itself. Some legal fields (particularly criminal law) and eras (particularly the nineteenth century) receive more attention than others (e.g., contract, property, the framing and ratification of the Constitution, and the Early Republic). Friedman's choice of emphases saves the book from the temptation to turn the book into a history of the Constitution itself. Instead he adopts an Oliver Wendell Holmesean view of law as a mirror of social change that permits him to turn the book into a dialogue between legal change and social developments.
There is so much ground to cover that his account of any particular legal field or social development is rather basic, but he provides an extensive annotated bibliography for further reading, and has himself written several other denser, thicker and more copious surveys of legal history that provide a logical next step. I certainly am itching to read more from Mr. Friedman.
As to Friedman's temperament and style, it is essentially that of a genial, wise center-left academic of a generation ago. He is attentive to injustices, but also attempts to describe the social conditions, traditions, religious beliefs, technology, or demographics that might have made earlier legal arrangements make sense, justified or not. The closer to the present he comes, the more his perspective takes on some partisanship. But then it is difficult for historians to be their best, cautious, multicausal selves about their own times. And he is a lively writer with a knack for a fact or a turn-of-phrase that rattles around in your mind. And all that makes him a perfect match for the description of the history of law, which is itself intensely textual, precedential, resistant to ideological lenses, but also vulnerable to sensationalism, drifting beliefs, and the colorful anecdote.
This one's worth reading.
There is so much ground to cover that his account of any particular legal field or social development is rather basic, but he provides an extensive annotated bibliography for further reading, and has himself written several other denser, thicker and more copious surveys of legal history that provide a logical next step. I certainly am itching to read more from Mr. Friedman.
As to Friedman's temperament and style, it is essentially that of a genial, wise center-left academic of a generation ago. He is attentive to injustices, but also attempts to describe the social conditions, traditions, religious beliefs, technology, or demographics that might have made earlier legal arrangements make sense, justified or not. The closer to the present he comes, the more his perspective takes on some partisanship. But then it is difficult for historians to be their best, cautious, multicausal selves about their own times. And he is a lively writer with a knack for a fact or a turn-of-phrase that rattles around in your mind. And all that makes him a perfect match for the description of the history of law, which is itself intensely textual, precedential, resistant to ideological lenses, but also vulnerable to sensationalism, drifting beliefs, and the colorful anecdote.
This one's worth reading.
April 7, 2025
Lawrence M. Friedman's Law in America remains true to its stated purpose: providing a concise yet insightful overview of the history of American law.
Friedman argues that legal systems do not operate in isolation but mirror broader societal values and trends. He illustrates this vividly by contrasting the 19th-century culture of entrepreneurial growth and progress—reflected in judicial decisions like those of Lemuel Shaw—with the 20th-century shift toward dismantling earlier structures, notably during the socially tumultuous Warren Court era, shaped by the civil rights and anti-Vietnam movements.
One of Friedman's compelling points is his exploration of "dual systems," highlighting the tensions between state-imposed laws and local cultural practices, notably in divorce law and red-light districts. He portrays this dynamic as an ongoing stalemate between moral prescriptions and popular behaviors.
In examining criminal justice, Friedman describes it not as a unified system, but rather as a "layer cake" where most public attention centers on high-profile cases (such as O.J. Simpson’s trial), while deeper structural and communal factors remain unseen. He touches briefly on America's adoption of the code system over common law in criminal justice, though a more detailed exploration would have been beneficial.
Friedman also effectively captures the pendulum-like nature of penal policy, where societal attitudes swing between leniency and severity, influenced largely by perceptions of crime rates. He emphasizes the jury’s critical role as a voice of community sentiment, bridging the gap between written laws and actual societal practices through unwritten norms.
Through landmark cases such as Farewell v. Worcester, Furman v. Georgia, McPherson v. Buick, and Gideon v. Wainwright, Friedman grounds his points in tangible historical events. Overall, Law in America is an accessible, engaging read—clear enough to be absorbed quickly yet insightful enough to leave a lasting impression.
Friedman argues that legal systems do not operate in isolation but mirror broader societal values and trends. He illustrates this vividly by contrasting the 19th-century culture of entrepreneurial growth and progress—reflected in judicial decisions like those of Lemuel Shaw—with the 20th-century shift toward dismantling earlier structures, notably during the socially tumultuous Warren Court era, shaped by the civil rights and anti-Vietnam movements.
One of Friedman's compelling points is his exploration of "dual systems," highlighting the tensions between state-imposed laws and local cultural practices, notably in divorce law and red-light districts. He portrays this dynamic as an ongoing stalemate between moral prescriptions and popular behaviors.
In examining criminal justice, Friedman describes it not as a unified system, but rather as a "layer cake" where most public attention centers on high-profile cases (such as O.J. Simpson’s trial), while deeper structural and communal factors remain unseen. He touches briefly on America's adoption of the code system over common law in criminal justice, though a more detailed exploration would have been beneficial.
Friedman also effectively captures the pendulum-like nature of penal policy, where societal attitudes swing between leniency and severity, influenced largely by perceptions of crime rates. He emphasizes the jury’s critical role as a voice of community sentiment, bridging the gap between written laws and actual societal practices through unwritten norms.
Through landmark cases such as Farewell v. Worcester, Furman v. Georgia, McPherson v. Buick, and Gideon v. Wainwright, Friedman grounds his points in tangible historical events. Overall, Law in America is an accessible, engaging read—clear enough to be absorbed quickly yet insightful enough to leave a lasting impression.
April 8, 2025
A really great introduction on the emergence of law in America and how it is a reflection of societal philosophy. It feels overly simplistic in places, and the book acknowledges this. It knows it is merely an introduction, a tool to get the reader interested in the topic and able to pursue readings about the specific aspect of law that has hooked the reader.
The last chapter discusses modern law and politics and how politics is now a giant reality show where public opinion is swayed by advertising and then used to push laws through. This text was published in 2004 and reads as a bit of foreboding for the later eras of 'alternate facts' and laws meant to make a statement, not address a problem.
The section about the increasing role of federal government concludes with discussing that while there were pushbacks at the time "No one nowadays would dream of removing social security other programs" (paraphrased). That stings a bit in 2025. I would be interested in reading the chapters added in a hypothetical new edition of this book.
The last chapter discusses modern law and politics and how politics is now a giant reality show where public opinion is swayed by advertising and then used to push laws through. This text was published in 2004 and reads as a bit of foreboding for the later eras of 'alternate facts' and laws meant to make a statement, not address a problem.
The section about the increasing role of federal government concludes with discussing that while there were pushbacks at the time "No one nowadays would dream of removing social security other programs" (paraphrased). That stings a bit in 2025. I would be interested in reading the chapters added in a hypothetical new edition of this book.
September 1, 2022
This is my third time through this one. It’s a decent introduction to American law and I wondered what it would feel like after a year of law school. The highlights are pretty open and honest coverage of colonial society and institutions as well as a decent overview of the 1L curriculum and the reality of legal practice.
One of the most interesting features of the book is the focus on the importance of secularization and pluralization of values in American culture. It’s interesting to hear the sweeping statements about how America has become a collection of identity affinity groups from a twenty year old book. Did this reflect “first wave” 1990s politically correct culture? Simple prescience? Something else? Interesting in any case.
One of the most interesting features of the book is the focus on the importance of secularization and pluralization of values in American culture. It’s interesting to hear the sweeping statements about how America has become a collection of identity affinity groups from a twenty year old book. Did this reflect “first wave” 1990s politically correct culture? Simple prescience? Something else? Interesting in any case.
November 26, 2024
A decent book for what it is. Considering it is relatively old a lot of the portion on the twenty-first century isn't great (but it does capture some trends) and portions of the twentieth century are also outdated because of cases/laws that have been overturned or neutered. Where the book excels is in the story it tells about law in America and its creation. It also manages to touch on many, if not most, of the key topics when it comes to American law. I would say the best chapter might be Chapter 5 "Crime and Punishment in the Republic" which tells a story that is important to understanding why criminal justice looks like it does now and for what it reveals about various schemes for reform.
August 1, 2025
Introductory in the finest use of the word. This book discovers nothing and makes no real points, but presents a pretty cohesive list of topics for readers to further investigate on their own. The whole book could just be it’s “notes for further reading” section and probably have similar merit, but the present material could be helpful for a very much so layman.
June 6, 2017
A short and easy read, by no means close to exhaustive. However, it is full of a lot of fascinating facts about American legal history that will have you texting your friends about your newfound knowledge.
September 10, 2020
I was looking for a survey of constitutional law and this is not it. It was more a very entry level social history of American law. However, the bibliographic essay in the end is worth it, and has lots of good histories and resources to check out.
July 18, 2019
Good lil history of law in America, 1650’s onwards. Meant more for a casual audience but nothing wrong with that!
September 19, 2010
The book is so short it's mostly generic overview with slightly more personality than you would find in a textbook, but what the book that has that is more unique is pretty good.
The most important point Friedman makes is the correspondence between the amount of law (where amount corresponds to the numbers of laws on the books, and also the number of lawyers and government agencies or percentage of GDP spent on their services) and increased demand for it. And the increased demand is a result of increase potential for conflict- the number of people an individual interacts with directly or indirectly has gone up greatly with increased wealth and technology and both correspond to increased freedom (Friedman doesn't mention technology or draw the line to freedom so explicitly but it's obviously connected).
Some editorial follows on the superficial calls for 'smaller government', and the conclusion I see is that those who genuinely want a smaller government on the right are identical to the desire in some parts on the left for a poorer, more primitive, less populated, and lower quality of living state that has less negative impact on the environment. And we're unlikely to accomplish either if the other half is kept constant- though some massive economic decline caused by war, financial or environmental collapse could get us there inadvertently.
The most important point Friedman makes is the correspondence between the amount of law (where amount corresponds to the numbers of laws on the books, and also the number of lawyers and government agencies or percentage of GDP spent on their services) and increased demand for it. And the increased demand is a result of increase potential for conflict- the number of people an individual interacts with directly or indirectly has gone up greatly with increased wealth and technology and both correspond to increased freedom (Friedman doesn't mention technology or draw the line to freedom so explicitly but it's obviously connected).
Some editorial follows on the superficial calls for 'smaller government', and the conclusion I see is that those who genuinely want a smaller government on the right are identical to the desire in some parts on the left for a poorer, more primitive, less populated, and lower quality of living state that has less negative impact on the environment. And we're unlikely to accomplish either if the other half is kept constant- though some massive economic decline caused by war, financial or environmental collapse could get us there inadvertently.
October 10, 2011
A good brief history of law in the United States. The author describes how law has changed over time, how laws have to more or less agree with the society in which they exist. The laws of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were much different than the laws of modern California -- the differences can almost be considered comical. Before the Civil War, there was a well-developed system of laws governing slavery. Now they are all gone. Civil rights laws passed in the past few decades would have been completely impossible in the 19th century.
The United States historically had a form of English common law (judge-made), as opposed to civil law (committee-made) which exists in most of the world. The author says that that is changing because of the torrent of Federal regulations coming from Washington.
The United States historically had a form of English common law (judge-made), as opposed to civil law (committee-made) which exists in most of the world. The author says that that is changing because of the torrent of Federal regulations coming from Washington.
May 11, 2007
A decent but frustratingly brief history of the interaction of law and society in this country. I have a pretty short attention span, so it's very rare that I'm looking for more depth and attention to detail in a non-fiction book, but that's what happened here. Overall, an okay read, but if you're looking for more than "the law has changed, and its evolution reflects the changes in society," then I would look to elsewhere -- probably Friedman's A History of Law in America covers a lot of the ground this book glosses over.
June 15, 2009
One of the few text books that I actually read all of. It was an easy read with a lot of interesting, and relevant information. It was pretty easy going for a required reading, but one that I enjoyed. It's short, but suprisingly helpful and informative. I didn't feel that the author wasted time. There was very little repetition in the book, which is always nice. He gets right to the point he wants to make, and then moves on to the next one.
May 10, 2011
This was a decent summary of American law- I learned quite a few interesting facts. But it is definitely a basic summary, and was not written very well. It's very clunky to read at times, and too colloquial sounding. Friedman is a professor, and oftentimes I wondered if someone just transcribed his lectures to turn them into a book. It was a nice jumping-off point, though, to do some deeper reading on the subject.
March 9, 2015
This is a lucid and very brief survey of American Colonial to the 21st Century law from a sociological perspective. The author underscores the reciprocal relationship among American culture, law making, enforcement, and the functional necessity of laws in modern states.
Also, and of weighted importance, he doesn't exclude the role of chance in legal developments.
I highly recommend this book and look forward to purchasing his other treatments of the history of American Law.
Also, and of weighted importance, he doesn't exclude the role of chance in legal developments.
I highly recommend this book and look forward to purchasing his other treatments of the history of American Law.
May 2, 2012
This an EXTREMELY brief overview. Only basic highlights in American legal history are discussed. That said, if you have a curiosity but not a passion to pick up a little bit of history, this is perfect for a weekend read.
February 7, 2016
The last chapter "American Law at the Dawn of the 21st Century" made the book. Friedman is critical of the media's role in politics (as well he should be) - this book was a great overview of the basics of law and society, and much more pleasant to read than a textbook.
July 2, 2008
Folks…it's a SHORT history, and it's just what it is. And it fulfills its title admirably.
May 13, 2009
Dull and surprisingly uninformative. Most of the history in this book is very basic stuff, and when it comes to his broader analysis, Friedman is too noncommittal.
November 2, 2009
Terms and history of law in America. Practical examples
January 31, 2010
The kind of book that an eminent scholar such as Lawrence Friedman could have written in crayon with his opposite hand. While juggling balls of fire with the other. Blindfolded. While sleeping.
July 22, 2010
This should be retitled Law in America: A Progressive's Short History. It did have an absolutely piercing and significant last few chapters on the modern Media-cracy.
March 21, 2011
A fascinating and short read. Very informative. Read in college and intend to re-read sometime.
April 25, 2011
Good brief intro to the history of American Law. Short and to the point, the book gives you the majorhistorical developments with suggestions for further reading on all of them.
May 3, 2011
Listened to the audio book. It's a good intro to basic concepts and history of law
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews