The Broken Constitution

A New York Times Book Review Editors' Choice An innovative account of Abraham Lincoln, constitutional thinker and doer Abraham Lincoln is justly revered for his brilliance, compassion, humor, and rededication of the United States to achieving liberty and justice for all. He led the nation into a bloody civil war to uphold the system of government established by the US Constitution—a system he regarded as the “last best hope of mankind.” But how did Lincoln understand the Constitution? In this groundbreaking study, Noah Feldman argues that Lincoln deliberately and recurrently violated the United States’ founding arrangements. When he came to power, it was widely believed that the federal government could not use armed force to prevent a state from seceding. It was also assumed that basic civil liberties could be suspended in a rebellion by Congress but not by the president, and that the federal government had no authority over slavery in states where it existed. As president, Lincoln broke decisively with all these precedents, and effectively rewrote the Constitution’s place in the American system. Before the Civil War, the Constitution was best understood as a compromise pact—a rough and ready deal between states that allowed the Union to form and function. After Lincoln, the Constitution came to be seen as a sacred text—a transcendent statement of the nation’s highest ideals. The Broken Constitution is the first book to tell the story of how Lincoln broke the Constitution in order to remake it. To do so, it offers a riveting narrative of his constitutional choices and how he made them—and places Lincoln in the rich context of thinking of the time, from African American abolitionists to Lincoln’s Republican rivals and Secessionist ideologues. Includes 8 Pages of Black-and-White Illustrations

A New York Times Book Review Editors’ Choice An innovative account of Abraham Lincoln, constitutional thinker and doer. When Abraham Lincoln assumed the presidency in 1861, the United States’ constitutional arrangements were not the ones we know today. It was widely believed that the federal government could not use armed force to prevent a state from seceding. It was also assumed that it had no authority over slavery in states where the institution existed and that basic civil liberties could not be suspended during a rebellion without the consent of Congress. As president, Lincoln broke decisively with all these precedents, deliberately and repeatedly violating the United States’ founding principles. To what end? How did Lincoln understand the Constitution and how did he transform it? In The Broken Constitution, Noah Feldman tells the full story of how Lincoln tore up the Constitution in order to save it. Prior to the Civil War, the document was best understood as a compromise pact—a rough-and-ready deal that allowed the Union to be forged from a disparate collection of states. After Lincoln, the Constitution came to be seen as a sacred text—a transcendent statement of the nation’s highest ideals. This happened because of the choices Lincoln made in dramatic circumstances; as violence raged, he variously ignored, reviled, and revised long-standing beliefs and set the country on a new path. Approaching the Civil War from a fresh angle, Feldman offers a riveting narrative of Lincoln’s constitutional choices and how he made them—from the resupply of Fort Sumter to the drafting of the Emancipation Proclamation, and from the arrest of newspaper editors and politicians who opposed the draft to the rethinking of the country’s core rights and to whom they belonged. To do so, he situates the sixteenth president within the rich context of the political and legal thinkers of his time, from African American abolitionists and traditionalist judges to Republican rivals and secessionist ideologues. The Broken Constitution calls not only for a reassessment of Lincoln himself but also for a new look at America’s founding document and its place in our law, our politics, and ourselves.

The compromise constitution -- The breaking constitution -- The choice of war -- Political prisoners -- Emancipation and morals.

Finalist for the 2022 Lincoln Prize An award-winning scholar uncovers the guiding principles of Lincoln’s antislavery strategies. The long and turning path to the abolition of American slavery has often been attributed to the equivocations and inconsistencies of antislavery leaders, including Lincoln himself. But James Oakes’s brilliant history of Lincoln’s antislavery strategies reveals a striking consistency and commitment extending over many years. The linchpin of antislavery for Lincoln was the Constitution of the United States. Lincoln adopted the antislavery view that the Constitution made freedom the rule in the United States, slavery the exception. Where federal power prevailed, so did freedom. Where state power prevailed, that state determined the status of slavery, and the federal government could not interfere. It would take state action to achieve the final abolition of American slavery. With this understanding, Lincoln and his antislavery allies used every tool available to undermine the institution. Wherever the Constitution empowered direct federal action—in the western territories, in the District of Columbia, over the slave trade—they intervened. As a congressman in 1849 Lincoln sponsored a bill to abolish slavery in Washington, DC. He reentered politics in 1854 to oppose what he considered the unconstitutional opening of the territories to slavery by the Kansas–Nebraska Act. He attempted to persuade states to abolish slavery by supporting gradual abolition with compensation for slaveholders and the colonization of free Blacks abroad. President Lincoln took full advantage of the antislavery options opened by the Civil War. Enslaved people who escaped to Union lines were declared free. The Emancipation Proclamation, a military order of the president, undermined slavery across the South. It led to abolition by six slave states, which then joined the coalition to affect what Lincoln called the "King’s cure": state ratification of the constitutional amendment that in 1865 finally abolished slavery.

Hyperpartisanship is as old as American democracy. But now, acrimony is not confined to a moment; it's a permanent state of affairs and has seeped into every part of the political process. Identifying the overriding problems that have led Congress—and the United States—to the brink of institutional collapse, It's Even Worse Than It Looks profoundly altered the debate about why America's government has become so dysfunctional. Through a new preface and afterword, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein bring the story forward, examining the 2012 presidential campaign and exploring the prospects of a less dysfunctional government. As provocative and controversial as ever, It's Even Worse Than It Looks will continue to set the terms of our political debate in the years to come.

Examines the significant gaps between what New York State’s constitution says and how the state is actually governed and offers ideas for reform. On its face, New York State’s constitution is an elaborate and impressive aggregation of processes, powers, mandates, and limits. But many of these are “inoperative,” and New Yorkers who read the document and believe what it says will come away with a massive misunderstanding of the realities of state government. The essays in New York’s Broken Constitution seek to clarify the realities by bringing attention to the gaps between what the constitution says and how the state is actually governed, and they provide a disquieting picture of the state of the state’s constitution. Among the topics addressed are state debt and budgeting practices, legislative redistricting, local government, gambling, conservation, and the process of amending the constitution. Written by knowledgeable professionals, the chapters explain the constitutional provisions in question, including the reasons for their constitutional status; how they have been used and interpreted; and the extent of the gaps between the constitutional provisions and practice. Various proposals for reform are also examined. Peter J. Galie is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Canisius College. Christopher Bopst is Chief Legal and Financial Officer at Sam-Son Logistics. They are the coauthors of The New York State Constitution, Second Edition. Gerald Benjamin is SUNY Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Director of the Benjamin Center at the State University of New York at New Paltz. He is coauthor (with Daniel L. Feldman) of Tales from the Sausage Factory: Making Laws in New York State, also published by SUNY Press, and coeditor (with Henrik N. Dullea) of Decision 1997: Constitutional Change in New York.

In this incisive and insightful book, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano peels back the legal veneer and shows how politicians, judges, prosecutors, and bureaucrats are trampling the U.S. Constitution in the name of law and order and fighting terrorism. Napolitano reveals how they: silence the First Amendment shoot holes in the Second break some laws to enforce others entrap citizens steal private property seize evidence without warrant imprison without charge kill without cause Pundits on the right, left, and center have praised Constitutional Chaos for its penetrating examination of our rights and liberties in the post-9/11 world. "Has the war on terrorism taken away some of your rights? In a non-ideological way, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano answers that crucial question. This book will open your eyes."-Bill O'Reilly "This book is a wake-up call for all who value personal freedom and limited government."-Rush Limbaugh "In all of the American media, Judge Napolitano is the most persistent, uncompromising guardian of both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. . ."-Nat Hentoff Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is Fox News Channel's senior judicial analyst, seen by millions on The Big Story with John Gibson, The O'Reilly Factor, Fox and Friends, and other shows. Hisarticles and commentaries have been published in the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Newark Star Ledger, and other national publications.

Two nationally renowned congressional scholars review the evolution of Congress from the early days of the republic to 2006, arguing that extreme partisanship and a disregard for institutional procedures are responsible for the institution's current state