Conservative talk radio host, lawyer, and frequent National Review contributor Mark R. Levin comes out firing against the United States Supreme Court in Men in Black, accusing the institution of corrupting the ideals of America's founding fathers. The court, in Levin's estimation, pursues an ideology-based activist agenda that oversteps its authority within the government. Levin examines several decisions in the court's history to illustrate his point, beginning with the landmark Marbury v. Madison case, wherein the court granted itself the power to declare acts of the other branches of government unconstitutional. He devotes later chapters to other key cases culminating in modern issues such as same-sex marriage and the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill. Like effective attorneys do, Levin packs in copious research material and delivers his points with tremendous vigor, excoriating the justices for instances where he feels strict constit utional constructivism gave way to biased interpretation. But Levin's definition of "activism" seems inconsistent. In the case of McCain-Feingold, the court declined to rule on a bill already passed by congress and signed by the president, but Levin, who thinks the bill violates the First Amendment, still accuses them of activism even when they were actually passive. To his talk-radio listeners, Levin's hard-charging style and dire warnings of the court's direction will strike a resonant tone of alarm, though the hyperbole may be a bit off-putting to the uninitiated. As an attack on the vagaries of decisions rendered by the Supreme Court and on some current justices, Men in Black scores points and will likely lead sympathetic juries to conviction. --John Moe

The bestselling Men in Black--first time in paperback! Lawyer and hugely popular radio talk show host Mark Levin throws the book at out-of-control liberal judges who ignore the Constitution, dismantle the rights of American citizens, and make up their own coercive law from the bench.

When the gold clause cases were decided in the 1930s, Justice James McReynolds was alleged to remark that the Constitution was gone. Indeed, his questionable background notwithstanding, the remark took place in the midst of the New Deal where FDR intimidated the court with his court-packing plan. The subsequent surrender by Justice Hughes and company marked the end of significant judicial restraint that Mr. Levin talks about in his book Men in Black.

The book presents a basic overview of the problem of activism that has plagued SCOTUS throughout its existence. The chapters cover various subjects of state and federal policy that the justices have taken upon themselves to interpet and reinterpet. Topics covered included early activism in the Dred Scott cases and the blocking of judicial nominees by the then-minority Democrats in the Senate. The discussion is not too heavy on facts and figures and is a little outdated with the passing of Chief Justice Renquist. Nevertheless, I recommend this book to get a overview of the subject.

Excellent historical and informative expose on how the nation's highest court is undermining our basic liberties and freedoms. Mark Levin is a straight shooter who tells it like it is and explains legalese concepts that are difficult to understand.

The "great one" Mark Levine has detailed the account of the Supreme Court in defying the separation of powers. The Court has increasing been making the law and not interpreting the constitution. Judicial tyranny is robbing us of our freedoms and Mr. Levine shows that Americans right to vote has been diminished. Our votes have at times been negated by the Supreme Court. The Founding Fathers desired three equal branches of government. However, the Supreme Court has succeeded in imposing it's will on the other braches and the voters. We have to understand the role of the judiciary branch in America. Without this knowledge we may lose our freedoms. Mark Levine has done an outstanding service to America in providing this writing.

What's the most pressing problem facing our nation? Well, there are a ton to choose from. You could say external forces looking to exterminate us. That would certainly be valid, but I'm always been more of an implosion versus explosion guy in terms threats. Frankly, I think our own seditionists are the biggest threat to our liberty. They'll bring down this country far earlier than any terrorists ever will. Over the last forty years the radicals have marched through our organizations, universities, and government and allowed what was once the counter-culture to become the culture. Nowhere is this more true than in our judiciary wherein the laws crafted by our representatives in the legislature have been struck down by judges who think it is their role to teach us what we should really want.

In the words of former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall: You do what you think is right and let the law catch up. Only, it's not the judiciary's role to make laws and that's why Mark Levin penned his masterpiece Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America. The book came out in 2005 so, as always, I got to its pages a little late. Unfortunately, nothing is going to change in the immediate future so it remains pertinent. Some of you may know Mark Levin's name, but, honestly, before this year I never listened to his talk radio show. After a month I discovered he's the best host out of them all. He also excels at writing. Essentially, Men in Black mirrors his approach to verbal conservatism: it's insightful, concise, and ruthlessly on topic. There's not a wasted word here. What I found most attractive about its narrative is that he makes extensive use of primary source documents. He lets the justices, in their opinions, tell their own tale. The book is a compilation of history and cogent analysis. He discusses specifically several of the 100 justices who have been members of the Supreme Court, and their flaws were readily apparent. They were men, not gods.

Levin offers readers an outstanding discussion of the most important court cases in our nation's history. Many of them I had read about before but have long since forgotten. His discussion of religion in Chapter 3 and the establishment clause was thoroughly enlightening. Specifically, we see how cases like Everson v. Board of Education created the fallacious doctrine of there being a "wall of separation" between church and state. Justice Rehnquist's opinion in Wallace v. Jeffree illustrates the method by which this notion was created. "Justices in the Bedroom" in Chapter Five was a standout as well, but most topical was Chapter Ten, "Silencing Political Debate." To what extent does McCain-Feingold erode our liberties? Right now it's hard to say. I agree with the author that advertising is speech, and the recent letter Obama sent to the Justice Department concerning the William Ayers ad put out by a 527 organization is an example of how the left will take advantage of any loophole as a means to silence their critics. Overall, we are not as free as we used to be and Mark Levin's Men in Black illustrates why this is the case.

I recommend this book to everyone. The information contained in this book is not only educational, but it is pertinent to the cultural battle that is underway today by liberals using activist judges to circumvent our constitution. An easy read, and a must read, and you will understand how the courts are having an effect upon you and your children, whether you realize it or not, by bypassing the legislative process to make the government do things we would never vote for in a million years.