The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court

The Nine is an in-depth portrayal of the current Supreme Court. Not only does Toobin cover the personality quirks and politics of the individual justices and their relationships with each other over time, he also analyzes the development and the current state of the Supreme Court's jurisprudence on key issues like abortion, gay rights, and affirmative action. Other than a few interesting bits of trivia, I didn't really learn anything new from The Nine, but I was entertained, and I think this book is a good introduction to the Supreme Court for those without much previous exposure.

In The Nine, Jeffrey Toobin produces a worthy sequel to The Brethren. Covering roughly the period from 1987 to 2007, Mr. Toobin examines how the personalities of the individuals appointed to the court influence the outcome of decisions at the highest level.

In many respects, The Nine is the story of just two justices, Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy. One of the first stories in the book is how Justices Souter, O'Connor and Kennedy crafted a middle of the road compromise in the Casey abortion case which stole the majority away from Chief Justice Rehnquist and kept the more conservative justices from sharply limiting Roe v. Wade.

The Nine traces Justice O'Connor's transformation from a conservative Goldwater Republican to a more liberal voice alienated from her party. The author analyzes Justice O'Connor (who was the only former legislator on the court) as a politician seeking compromise and narrow opinions and trying to reach results consistent with popular opinion.

Her fellow swing vote, Justice Kennedy, receives a less sympathetic treatment. He is portrayed as having a love for flowery rhetoric and empty phrases. Despite their differing styles, they frequently held the balance on the court.

The differing styles of the Kennedy-O'Connor axis had dramatic fallout in Bush v. Gore. In that case, Justice Kennedy inclined toward a dramatic equal protection theory, while Chief Justice Rehnquist opted toward a more technical result under Article II of the Constitution. Justice O'Connor felt that the Florida Supreme Court was playing politics trying to help Al Gore win the election and that the result didn't pass the smell test. She wanted to find a middle ground for striking down the Florida Supreme Court's decision without joining the conservatives on the court. As a result, she agreed to sign on to Anthony Kennedy's opinion, but only if he would tone down his grand pronouncements. In response, Justice Kennedy added a sentence stating that each case was unique and that the Court was not laying down any general principles. O'Connor the politician severely miscalculated here. The Court's opinion was so narrow that it appeared to apply in just one case: allowing George W. Bush to win the election. By trying to go for a narrow, middle of the road solution, Justice O'Connor steered the court into a result that was just as political as the meddling by the Florida Supreme Court which she found to be disagreeable.

The Nine has a good job of depicting the justices as individuals. Clarence Thomas gets a sympathetic portrayal as a NASCAR-loving man of the people who was far more engaged than commonly believed.

Jeffrey Toobin highlights Justice Souter's quirky sense of humor. On being mistaken for Justice Breyer, he was asked what he enjoyed most about serving on the Court. With a perfectly straight face, he replied that it was the honor of serving with David Souter.

The book also captures the unusual collegiality of a court which was sharply divided on ideological grounds. Chief Justices Rehnquist and Roberts are given credit by their colleagues for running a process that was fair and open in conference in contrast to the more heavy handed Warren Burger. Judges of differing viewpoints vacationed and played cards together. Indeed, one of the most poignant stories in the book is the sadness felt by Justice Ginsberg when her two best friends on the court, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice O'Connor, were no longer there.

Mr. Toobin's liberal point of view shows in a few instances. He doesn't quite get the Federalist Society. He describes the Federalist Society as being the vanguard of a conservative revolution to re-make the court. However, other than a few statements of core principles, the Federalist Society does not take positions on issues or litigate cases. Rather, it is a debating society of conservative and libertarian lawyers who generally favor judicial restraint. Mr. Toobin also devotes several passages to the prominent role of the Constitution-in-Exile movement, a position so obscure that many conservatives are not aware that it exists. (See the recent discussion in the Volokh Conspiracy blog for proof of this).

Despite these minor shortcomings, Mr. Toobin has produced a very readable and well-researched book. In addition to sketching detailed portraits of the individual justices, the book is a good syllabus of the major opinions of the Supreme Court over the past 20 years.

A history of the last 20 or so years of supreme court justices, namely the justices of the rehnquist court, but the end does talk about the nominations of john roberts and alito. Its kind of bland. I thought it would be a little more exciting, considering it was a best seller. How much discussion on Roe v Wade, death penalty, and gay rights can someone actually read about without being bored to tears.

This is a book about the Supreme Court. For those of you with no knowledge of the judicial branch of government, there are nine justices on the Supreme Court. This book focuses on the recent history of the court, especially the years since Bush v. Gore in 2000. Toobin gives the backgrounds of the current justices and the selection process behind many of their nominations.

I found this book engaging and interesting. This is obviously a guy who has followed the Supreme Court very closely and his commentary in weaving together different episodes and characters gave me a greater appreciation for the court. It was not, however, a book I could not put down. I put it down several times and only recently finished it. It has been so long since I actually finished a book I figured I should finally finish one.

This book is accessible to all readers, but for those with only a passing interest in the judiciary, it is probably too much. I follow the Supreme Court fairly closely, and I enjoyed it a lot. This book is not quite as good as "The Brethren" by Bob Woodward, which focused on the Burger court of the mid-70s, but it is still very good.

Toobin's book provides an interesting perspective on the personalities at play in the Supreme Court, while also providing a window into some of the countries most influential cases. The book is balanced in its approach. His focus is primarily on more recent justices, starting with the Rehnquist court.

I found his description of Souter to be among most interesting and comical due to Souters unique personality. Toobin writes, "At first Souters eccentricities drew more notice around the court than his jurisprudence. Fifty-two years old and a lifelong bachelor, he has the habits of a gentleman from another country...He ate the same thing for lunch every day: an entire apple, including the core and seeds, with a cup of yogurt. When the justices sat together in their dining room, the two items would be delivered to Souter on the same fine china that served his colleagues; Souter was familiar with Coca Cola, but he had never heard of a beverage that several of the others justices favored - Diet Coke" (p. 43)

He goes on to describe a successful date Souter had with a woman that Justice O'Connor set him up with. "She thought the evening had gone very well - until the end. Souter took her home, told her what a good time he had, then added 'Let's do this again next year'" (p. 244)