Quite a solid review of the Court’s recent history, since about 2009. I quite enjoyed learning more about Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan, and I think I left with a more sympathetic view of Kagan than before. I was also surprised to learn about some of the machinations of the nomination process - for example I didn’t realize how close Diane Wood came to being nominated.

His evisceration of originalism is not exactly new, but it’s certainly welcome and it’s argued more vigorously than I anticipated. He has a surprising take on Clarence Thomas which I don’t remember from The Nine - that Thomas has been influential by virtue of bringing new ideas (directly from the Federalist Society, it seems) into the Court, and that he has moved jurisprudence in his direction systematically over a number of years. Quite troubling.

The book does not provide a whole lot of context to the conservative law-and-economics movement that has been shaping the Court for several decades. That movement is a large part of the story behind the conservative ascendancy on the Court, but perhaps that story would be a bit out of place here. If you’re interested in that level of detail, I’d highly recommend Un-Making Law, by Jay Feinman.