Results by title

Acclaimed boxing writer Thomas Hauser admires the sweet science, but he also recognizes and confronts its problems. His essays here portray the sport in all its glory and gore, its grace and disgrace.

Hauser tracks the effects of big money on the sport, exposes corruption at the highest levels, and examines the emotional links between the September 11 attack on America and the way we experience the violence of boxing. He follows the biggest fighters and the most important fights through 2001 into the early months of 2002. He also depicts the broadcasters, government regulators, and others-the people behind the scenes who shape boxing without ever taking a punch. We meet fighters such as Lennox Lewis, Mike Tyson, and Bernard Hopkins, and non-combatants like ringside physician Margaret Goodman, trainer Eddie Futch, and the powers that be at HBO.

Praise for Thomas Hauser’s writing about professional boxing:

New York Times: Incomparable and indispensable.
Washington Post: Brilliantly crafted.
New York Daily News:The best writing so far on the business of boxing.
Boxing Collectors’ News: A. J. Liebling’s current-day successor.
Ring Magazine: No one has ever done it better.

The United States Supreme Court’s 2002–03 term confounded Court watchers. The same Rehnquist Court that many had seen as solidly conservative and unduly activist—the Court that helped decide the 2000 presidential election and struck down thirty-one federal statutes since 1995—issued a set of surprising, watershed rulings. In a term filled with important and unpredictable decisions, it upheld affirmative action, invalidated a same-sex sodomy statute, and reversed a death sentence due to ineffective assistance of counsel. With essays focused on individual Justices, Court practices, and some of last year’s most important rulings, this volume explores the meaning and significance of the Court’s 2002–03 term. Seasoned Supreme Court advocates and journalists from The New Republic, The Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, National Journal, Slate, and Legal Times grapple with questions about the Rehnquist Court’s identity and the Supreme Court’s role in the political life of the country.

Some essays consider the role of “swing” Justices Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy within a Court that divides 5–4 more than any other group of Justices in the nation’s history. Others examine the political reaction to and legal context of the Court’s Lawrence v. Texas decision declaring a Texas law criminalizing homosexual sodomy unconstitutional. Contributors analyze the Court’s rulings on affirmative action and reassess its commitment to states’ rights. Considering the Court’s practices, one advocate explores the use and utility of amicus curiae, or “friend of the court” briefs, while another reflects on indications of an increased openness by the Court to public scrutiny. Two advocates who argued cases before the Court—one related to hate speech and the other to a “three strikes and you’re out” criminal statute—offer vivid accounts of their experiences. Intended for general readers, A Year at the Supreme Court is for all those who want to understand the Rehnquist Court and its momentous 2002–03 term.

Contributors
Erwin Chemerinsky
Neal Devins
Davison M. Douglas
David J. Garrow
Dahlia Lithwick
Tony Mauro
Carter Phillips
Ramesh Ponnuru
Jeffrey Rosen
David G. Savage
Rodney A. Smolla
Stuart Taylor Jr.