Professor Hyneman's book represents still another entry in the current debate over the proper role of judicial review in a democratic society.' Although he approaches this subject via an analysis of several recent attacks upon the United States Supreme Court, Professor Hyneman essentially deals with the same topics-the legitimacy of judicial review, the proper standards applicable to constitutional adjudication, and the alleged departure of the school segregation cases2 from those standards-that have served as the subject of several books and at least a score of articles published within the past five years.3 Indeed the writing in this area has grown so voluminous that it is difficult for anyone except a full-time student of constitutional law to read it all. Accordingly, any evaluation of a new book in this area must take into account the "competition." Judged in this light, The Supreme Court on Trial, while a fairly interesting and possibly useful volume, hardly ranks as "essential reading" for the lawyer who is interested in the subject of judicial review. Professor Hyneman obviously has produced a better work than several other authors dealing with the same topic, 4 but, in my opinion, his contribution still falls far short of the excellence of the best literature in this field.5
Israel, Jerold H. Review of The Supreme Court on Trial, by C. S. Hyneman. Vand. L. Rev. 18 (1964): 349-56.