On the eve of a presidential election that may determine the makeup of Supreme Court justices for decades to come, prominent attorney James D. Zirin argues that the Court has become increasingly partisan, rapidly making policy choices right and left on bases that have nothing to do with law or the Constitution. Zirin explains how we arrived at the present situation and looks at the current divide through its leading partisans, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor on the left and Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas on the right. He also examines four of the Court’s most controversial recent decisions – Hobby Lobby, Obamacare, gay marriage, and capital punishment – arguing that these politicized decisions threaten to undermine public confidence in the Supreme Court.

"A leading litigator engagingly explores what many readers already know: the Supreme Court votes along party lines. In this highly knowledgeable and entirely accessible book, Zirin (The Mother Court: Tales of Cases that Mattered in America's Greatest Trial Court, 2014) shows that what many readers thought they knew about our nation's highest court only touched the surface. At the beginning, the author apologizes to all-knowing attorneys for his brief but comprehensive history of the court. This is not just a list of famous cases, but rather explanations of their origins and far-reaching results. Many of us knew Marbury v. Madison established judicial review, but Zirin explains how President John Adams' 'midnight appointments' at the end of his term set it off. Politically motivated decisions are not especially new; the Lochner era represented 40 years of the court tilting toward big business to strike down New Deal legislation. Zirin notes that traditional tools of judicial analysis—text, meaning, original understanding, and precedents—are supposed to be the criteria to say what the law is. The use of originalism, textualism, and natural law skews those tools, bending them to what the justice wants them to mean. The author cites Citizens United, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, Bush v. Gore as modern cases of a highly partisan ilk, and he agrees with historians who claim that Dred Scott was a principal cause of the Civil War. It not only denied a slave's humanity, but also declared the Missouri Com promise unconstitutional. The chapters on the current justices—including the Catholic Seat (five are Catholic), the Jewish (three are Jewish), the Female, the Black, and now the Latina Seat—are crisp, insightful, and spot-on. A top-notch book about the Supreme Court. Zirin has his finger on its pulse, and he shows the rest of us how it works and how it doesn't." - Kirkus, Starred Review

"Former Assistant US Attorney James Zirin presents an interesting discussion of the impact of partisanship on the current US Supreme Court. The book is timely considering the controversy surrounding the replacement of Justice Scalia. One benefit of the book is that it is well-researched. Excellent information is provided in an accessible manner (without much legal jargon). Zirin also focuses on some of the most important Supreme Court decisions in recent years, such as health care and freedom of religion. . . .Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates through faculty." - CHOICE

"[Supremely Partisan: How Raw Politics Tips the Scales in the United States Supreme Court] is a worthwhile book that provokes thought on what the bar and body politic should reasonably expect from our public courts.... It is written for lay readers, but lawyers will also find it useful.... [T]he author displays an articulate grasp of the personalities and arguments that have produced the court's most controversial decisions. The book is written in an evocative style that readers will find entertaining ... [This book] is informative and useful." - New York Law Journal