Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir Audiobook

" Honestly, I gave up on this one. I couldn't follow it when he jumped around between people and years. Maybe it's just an inability to focus lately.... "

" Very honest account of Stevemns' interactions with the Chiefs. As a legal history geek, found it fascinating. Could have been a bit more in depth and appending the text of the Constitution was lame b "

" Interesting history, but the book lacked cohesion. "

" Interesting but not always compelling. The focus on the cases decided in the terms was an interesting framing device but the information was often too compacted to get a true understanding of the impact of the cases and a read on the Chiefs who presided over them. "

" Great insight into the mind of Justice Stevens. Also, a good history of the Supreme Court. "

" I had pretty high expectations for this book, I liked the concept and I have a lot of respect for JPS. Unfortunately the book felt rushed, directionless, and dry. Some of it was interesting, of course, but I felt as though it was poorly put together. "

" A brief, quirky memoir that flows with Justice Steven's warmth. Partly on the inner workings of the court, some on his views on jurisprudence (you certainly learn his thoughts on the 11th amendment!), and a fair bit on his assessments of the chief justices. Not groundbreaking, and no surprises, but still an enjoyable tour of his thoughts on the last fifty years of the Court. "

" Easy read except sometimes following his opinions was hard. He dissented from the majority opinion that over turned a judgement that invalidated etc. That was too many negatives for me. I liked the historical view and the look into the workings of the court. "

" 2012. I had high hopes for this book. It is just not as interesting as I hoped it would be. I've always liked the Steven's opinions even when I didn't agree with his ruling. I found myself extremely bored with this book. "

" A great view into the supreme court! "

" Parts of this book were interesting but it wasn't necessarily an easy read. I learned alot though! "

" Provided some interesting insights as to how the Supreme Court functions and how some cases were decided, but didn't explain the legal issues as well as I'd hoped. "

" academic and dull, didn't finish "

" A good, quick read, but it never completely delivered for me. I think I may have been hoping for too much dirt! "

" Bore "

" Not necessarily a bad book, but just one I wasn't very interested in. It's full of discussions of constitutional issues in much more detail than I was interested in, and not very much about personalities. "

" Terrific book. Easy to read, clear explanation of complex cases; amazingly clear. Lots of insight into Justice Stevens, and a nice history of the court. "

" Interesting - didn't understand 10% of the cases he was talking about or the decisions, but interesting takes on personalities "

" A look behind the robes. Stevens adds a touch of humanity to the Supreme Court. "

" The book focuses on the five Chief Justices that Justice Stevens had met, but also provides a short bio on all Chief Justices of the United States. The book gives a nice, behind the scenes look at the Supreme Court. "

" Too much of an 8th grade history lesson. "

" This is a terrific book about Justice Stevens' dealings with Chief Justices. It contains some legal analysis, a good deal of discussion of the daily workings of the Supreme Court, and a little gossip. "

" I enjoyed this book, but then I like books like this and Rehnquist's The Supreme Court. I would recommend this to anyone also interested in the topic. It should be noted that Stevens uses a lot of legal language. "

" I had pretty high expectations for this book, I liked the concept and I have a lot of respect for JPS. Unfortunately the book felt rushed, directionless, and dry. Some of it was interesting, of course, but I felt as though it was poorly put together. "

" Enjoyable book, although it felt like Stevens wanted to reiterate why he voted as he did on cases he felt were wrongly decided rather than write an objective history. "