America's Lone Star Constitution: How Supreme Court Cases from Texas Shape the Nation by Lucas A. Powe Jr. (review)

America's Lone Star Constitution may be the epitome of breezy nonfiction. It is easy to read in short sessions as well as sustained periods. It is written by an expert with a deep knowledge of constitutional law who possesses a knack for the telling human detail. And it is filled with wide-ranging opinions on the Supreme Court and its justices, Texas and Texans, and the workings of law and politics. The book is also wonderfully organized, consisting of four substantive parts, within each of which are several related chapters. Each chapter is further divided. The parts are bookended by a delightful introduction and a sound, though less insightful, conclusion. The many Supreme Court cases discussed provide some understanding of the multitudes of Texas.

The introduction grabs the reader's attention by discussing the possible constitutional infirmity of the annexation of Texas by joint resolution of Congress rather than by treaty. John Quincy Adams and other abolitionists opposed adding Texas, and no treaty would have met supermajority Senate approval. From there Powe segues to Texas v. White, the post-Civil War case declaring the Union "indestructible" (1), and to Governor Rick Perry's 2009 suggestion that Texans might again consider secession. Part I discusses issues of racial discrimination in voting before and after the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and then includes Texas affirmative action cases. Part II moves from cases involving oil and railroads to school finance and immigration. Part III assesses issues of individual rights, particularly First Amendment free speech and religious liberty cases, as well as Roe v. Wade. Part IV brings together a disparate set of constitutional cases, from Lawrence v. Texas, which invalidated sodomy laws in Texas and other states, to capital punishment and congressional redistricting. The conclusion notes several additional important cases unmentioned earlier, demonstrating that one could teach a course in constitutional law using Texas-only cases.

Although the book is enjoyable and informative, it is not without its drawbacks. Readers should be aware that Powe is a political liberal who offers his opinions freely. He twice links Antonin Scalia to the Koch brothers for no relevant reason, and twice insists that Clarence Thomas is bitter, although his footnoted explanation is unconvincing. Because Powe believes a judge's political affiliation explains his or her decisions, he regularly reminds readers that a judge is a conservative or a liberal. When he concludes that politics and judicial decisions diverge, he evokes surprise or engages in judicial mind-reading. Powe also invokes superlatives to juxtapose ironic declarations. For example, he declares Felix Frankfurter "the most qualified appointee to the Court in the twentieth century" (79) so he can note the irony that Frankfurter's jurisprudence left him less than "an all-time great" (79). Frankfurter was indeed smart, savvy, and a scholar of the Court. But he had never served as a judge when nominated to it. That does not make him more qualified than Holmes, Cardozo, or many others.

The book offers many facts and factoids. The facts, often brief biographies of the actors in these cases, are informative and engaging. The factoids are often puzzling, as few are sourced and many seem irrelevant. For example, Powe writes that Justice Lewis Powell "had more gay clerks than any other justice but obviously did not know that" (207). He also notes that Justice Anthony Kennedy, "as a Catholic, didn't want" to write an opinion in an abortion case (190). It is unclear how Powe knows this, as no footnotes accompany these claims.

The conceit of the book, that interpretation of the federal Constitution is tied to Texas, is merely an enticement. Though Powe argues that Texas's specific culture generated many of these cases, the book is better understood as explaining constitutional law through cases that happened to arise in Texas. It does so admirably, despite...