Product Description
Clearly written and laced with a delicious wit, this lacerating and lively critique of America’s bloated legal system reveals the folly of our addiction to law.Amazon.com Review
“The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” –Henry IV, Part I Or, suggests Paul F. Campos, at the very least, let’s put them out of their misery. In Jurismania, Campos does his best to demonstrate that the behavior of the legal mind, with its insistence on the “rule o… More >>
Tags: amazon, critique, folly, henry iv, insistence, misery, paul f campos, wit
Campos is polemical, wicked, funny–all of that. But this is a smart and serious book. It does not argue that all law is madness, or that all lawyers are mad. It argues that enough is enough, and too much is too much, and America has way, way too much. America has made a fetish of legal procedure, continuing to unwind legal red tape and generate numberless rules and hurdles long past the point where procedure does or can serve any rational purpose. Campos’s method is rigorous enough to deserve the attention of lawyers who would prefer to dismiss him, and his style is vigorous enough to make him a good read on the bus. Not to be missed.
Rating: 5 / 5
Paul Campos, a professor of law at the University of Colorado, offers an insider’s view of the slow decay of law from a focus on justice to a focus on living up to the letter of ever more arcane law.
Campos covers a wide swath of topics, from the arbitrary nature of NCAA rules to the O.J. and Paula Jones cases to the drug war to his own town of Boulder Colorado. It is impressive that he manages to tie all of these issues together into one specific theme–that society’s litigiousness is undermining both the rule of law and the equitable and, paradoxically, the efficient functioning of society.
He does not duck the tough issues; his takes on abortion, the drug war, and assisted suicide fit in with his overall theme and, while they may not please readers on either side of these controversies, he presents fresh arguments that will force open-minded readers to consider these issues in a new light.
Perhaps most impressive is the fact that Campos covers all these topics in a succinct 198 pages. Lesser writers would have needed 800 pages to cover all the topics that Campos covers in much less space.
Campos makes effective use of humor and cultural references (the Monty Python skit he cites–I won’t spoil its use–is used brilliantly to illustrate his point).
This book is not for everyone. Certainly people who don’t have an interest in the vagaries of the law would avoid a book like this.
People who have a direct stake in the arcaneness (there’s the word again) of the current legal system will likely be bothered by this book, but I don’t think that’s a particularly bad outcome. Campos has written from an outsider’s view (which is where I come from since I am not an attorney) with an insider’s understanding of the jargon and the institutions, which make his indictment all the more devastating.
I can certainly foresee this book being the subject of much debate in law schools in the years to come. I’ve jokingly told friends considering the legal profession “don’t do it! We don’t nee! d any more lawyers!” As long as we have a few lawyers with the perspective of Paul Campos there’s still hope for the profession.
Rating: 5 / 5
I got this book after reading a nasty review of it in the New York Times. The book had really upset the reviewer, and after reading it I can see why it did. It’s a merciless indictment of the defenders of the legal status quo, and it’s also hilarious. If you’ve ever thought the American legal system was crazy, this book explains why you were right.
As someone who has practiced law for more than a decade, I can’t think of a better book for a lawyer, or especially someone thinking about being a lawyer, to read. If we had more law professors who thought like Campos, we wouldn’t have the system that he so thoroughly devastates in this book.
Rating: 5 / 5
Campos uses pop culture and personal experience to weave a side-splitting account of how enamored we have become with the legal process. He handily demonstrates that even as we lament the shortcomings of the legal system, we become more and more dependent on this peculiar form of dialogue and decision-making. Like junkies who no longer enjoy the high, yet still reach for the needle, Americans not only continue to use the legal process to resolve all forms of dispute — we also allow law into every corner of our lives. Campos takes us on field trips into grocery stores, classrooms, libraries, and even the doctor’s office, while pointing out the legal markers which have infilitrated each of these bastions of 20th century life. This book is provocative, insightful, and a necessary reminder of how obsessive we have become. Most of all, it’s so funny you’ll enjoy the lecture.
Rating: 5 / 5
JURISMANIA seemed like a congenial book for one to read after answering the above question with, “A good start.”
A lawyer himself, Campos strives to insist that American law has burgeoned to the point of being ludicrous, arational and approaching irrelevance. He makes his case with such observations as:
“… the decade-long appeal, the 100-page appellate court opinion, the 200-page law review article, the 1,000 page statute, and so on. These sorts of legal artifacts are the fruit of futile, hypertrophied exercises in forms of argument that call themselves ‘reason’, but that in fact must conclude with the assertion of axiomatic or circular propositions. And the excessive, jurismaniacal character of such monuments to rationalist vanity can itself be understood as the product of what is in essence a kind of obsessive-compulsive reaction to the neurotic structure of American legal thought.”
And this:
“… to call something a question of constitutional law is not so much an act of formal categorization as it is a shorthand way of signaling that it involves the most intractable moral and political issues our society faces. Constitutional law is the categorical dumping ground for everything the normal political process can’t digest: race and religion, sex, and death. All the things one should never bring up in polite conversation.”
Probably the most useful concept I came away with was that of “equilibrium zone”, i.e. that interface between two polar opposite but equally powerful moral, legal, or social forces. Because both forces must ultimately be placated, it’s in this zone that promulgated laws achieve a frustrating ambiguity that renders them open to diverse interpretations and, therefore, pretty much useless.
Campos supports his case with extensive sidebars into philosophy, metaphysics, and quotes from Nietzche – all of which left me, a Life Science kind of guy, pretty much dazed. Perhaps the author was trying too hard. Indeed, my metaphysical experience is confined to considering whether the burger in front of me is real or an illusion and, if the former, whether it contains cheese or not. I suggest that law students might find JURISMANIA intellectually provocative, but I too often lost the thread and therefore must deduct points.
Rating: 3 / 5