By AMY W. LAI

contributing writer

Who could resist the lure of an insider’s look at the Supreme Court, written by the Chief Justice himself? Especially when, in the preface, William H. Rehnquist states that he is writing for “the interested, informed non-lawyer,” and wishes to “leave the reader feeling that he knows considerably more about the Supreme Court when he puts the book down than he did when he picked it up”? In the aptly titled The Supreme Court, Rehnquist succeeds in doing exactly that, throwing in anecdotes, trivia and a tour of American history while shedding light on the branch of government most shrouded in mystery.

The book begins with a detailed tale of Rehnquist’s first experience with the Supreme Court in 1952 when starting work as Justice Robert Jackson’s law clerk. Rehnquist offers details of nearly everything: the drive in a small blue Studebaker from his parents’ home in Wisconsin, the seemingly endless steps up the Supreme Court building, his first glimpse of the courtroom, his first memorandum to recommend whether a hearing should be granted for a certain case. Though interesting, the pace of the first chapter seems to creep along interminably.

What follows is a whirlwind romp through American history as it pertains to the Supreme Court. Rehnquist offers short sketches of influential justices who aren’t as well known, such as Justices Joseph Story, Samuel Miller and Rufus Peckham. His description of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s failed attempt to “pack” the Supreme Court is especially engaging, and brings to life the drama of the event. Every major case touched upon in high school U.S. history is at least mentioned, and sometimes lavishly described, up through the Warren Court. Marbury v. Madison, Gibbons v. Ogden, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. United States and Miranda v. Arizona are revisited. Rehnquist explains his omission of more recent cases by stating that he chose not to discuss cases in which “any of [his] present colleagues have played a part.” A background in US history is helpful, especially since this section reads like a history textbook. Not only is the tone academic, but it can also be unexpectedly personal. Rehnquist occasionally adds interjections, when he shifts from third to first person. For example, while explaining how geographic qualifications of the justices related to appointments in the Supreme Court, Rehnquist uses himself as an example: “My commission as associate justice showed me as being from Arizona, but my commission as chief justice shows me as being from Virginia.” Interjections like this are somewhat jarring in the midst of the narrative flow, and make it impossible to forget that the book was written by a current Supreme Court justice.

The latter chapters of the book finally provide what a straight history textbook wouldn’t: a “how-it-really-works” look at the Supreme Court. Rehnquist describes how cases are chosen, how they are argued,and how decisions are made. As in the first chapter, Rehnquist offers more details than the reader can possibly absorb. For example, conferences to discuss the cases take place on Wednesday afternoon and Friday conferences begin at 9:30 a.m. for most of the year. The chief justice and senior associate justice sit at opposite ends of a rectangular conference table, and thus have unrestricted elbow room. Rehnquist also adds a human element to the workings of the Supreme Court: He and Justice Harry Blackmun shared geography trivia during dull moments on the bench, and Thurgood Marshall was the Court’s raconteur. Rehnquist also justifies the way the current procedure works. He effectively addresses concerns about the Court: that law clerks may wield too much influence, that the majority of cases petitioning for a hearing aren’t even discussed, or that cases are only allowed one hour of the Court’s time.

In this book, one gets the sense that Chief Justice Rehnquist is confident in his position and proud of his branch of the government. The book ends with a resounding declaration: “There is no reason to doubt that [the Supreme Court] will continue as a vital and uniquely American institutional participant in the everlasting search of civilized society for the proper balance between liberty and authority, between the state and the individual.” And has the book succeeded in the balancing act between accessibility and technical detail? For the most part, yes. Perhaps The Supreme Court wouldn’t be a choice for a light summer reading book, but it has a certain richness of detail that is valuable. A slight embarrassment of this richness, perhaps?