|Print List Price:||CDN$ 23.00|
|Kindle Price:|| CDN$ 16.99 |
Save CDN$ 6.01 (26%)
|Sold by:|| Simon & Schuster Canada, Inc. |
This price was set by the publisher.
Follow the Author
Fight of the Century: Writers Reflect on 100 Years of Landmark ACLU Cases Kindle Edition
|New from||Used from|
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
On January 19, 1920, a small group of idealists and visionaries, including Helen Keller, Jane Addams, Roger Baldwin, and Crystal Eastman, founded the American Civil Liberties Union. A century after its creation, the ACLU remains the nation’s premier defender of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.
In collaboration with the ACLU, authors Michael Chabon and Ayelet Waldman have curated an anthology of essays “full of struggle, emotion, fear, resilience, hope, and triumph” (Los Angeles Review of Books) about landmark cases in the organization’s one-hundred-year history. Fight of the Century takes you inside the trials and the stories that have shaped modern life. Some of the most prominent cases that the ACLU has been involved in—Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Miranda v. Arizona—need little introduction. Others you may never even have heard of, yet their outcomes quietly defined the world we live in now. Familiar or little-known, each case springs to vivid life in the hands of the acclaimed writers who dive into the history, narrate their personal experiences, and debate the questions at the heart of each issue.
Hector Tobar introduces us to Ernesto Miranda, the felon whose wrongful conviction inspired the now-iconic Miranda rights—which the police would later read to the man suspected of killing him. Yaa Gyasi confronts the legacy of Brown v. Board of Education, in which the ACLU submitted a friend of- the-court brief questioning why a nation that has sent men to the moon still has public schools so unequal that they may as well be on different planets. True to the ACLU’s spirit of principled dissent, Scott Turow offers a blistering critique of the ACLU’s stance on campaign finance.
These powerful stories, along with essays from Neil Gaiman, Meg Wolitzer, Salman Rushdie, Ann Patchett, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Louise Erdrich, George Saunders, and many more, remind us that the issues the ACLU has engaged over the past one hundred years remain as vital as ever today, and that we can never take our liberties for granted.
Chabon and Waldman are donating their advance to the ACLU and the contributors are forgoing payment.
"Forceful, beautifully written and often humorous . . . The essays in Fight of the Century may be brief, but each packs a mighty wallop. . . . This is a book to read, share and keep." —Associated Press
"Full of struggle, emotion, fear, resilience, hope, and triumph." —Los Angeles Review of Books
“Moving . . . Entertaining . . . It’s enlightening to watch some of our most masterly literary portraitists restore the warts and wardrobes, the motivations and machinations to those whose stories have been stripped down to surnames or pseudonyms.”
—Monica Youn, New York Times Book Review
"Vigorous, informative, and well-organized, this outstanding collection befits the ACLU’s substantial impact on American law and society."
—Publishers Weekly (starred review)
"A stunning collection of original and topical essays . . . [that] vividly brings consequential court cases to life."
—Booklist (starred review)
"A finely edited almanac of lively, contextually grounded stories that read like the greatest hits of freedom . . . Provides insights that are both riveting and refreshingly diverse."
—Kirkus Reviews --This text refers to the hardcover edition.
About the Author
Ayelet Waldman is the author of the memoir, A Really Good Day, as well as of novels including Love and Treasure, Red Hook Road, and Love and Other Impossible Pursuits. She is the editor of Inside This Place, Not of It: Narratives from Women's Prisons, and with Michael Chabon, of Kingdom of Olives and Ash: Writers Confront the Occupation.
Other contributors include: Viet Thanh Nguyen, Jacqueline Woodson, Michael Chabon, Ann Patchett, Brit Bennett, Steven Okazaki, Daniel Handler, Geraldine Brooks, Yaa Gyasi, Sergio De La Pava, Dave Eggers, Timothy Egan, Yiyun Li, Meg Wolitzer, Hector Tobar, Aleksandar Hemon, Elizabeth Strout, Nicole Adrian LeBlanc, Rabih Alameddine, Moriel Rothman-Zecher, Jonathan Lethem, Salman Rushdie, Lauren Groff, Ayelet Waldman, Jennifer Egan, Scott Turow, Morgan Parker, Victor LaValle, Michael Cunningham, Neil Gaiman, Jesmyn Ward, George Saunders, Marlon James, William Finnegan, Anthony Doerr, Charlie Jane Anders, Brenda J. Childs, Andrew, Sean Greer, Francisco Goldman, and Louise Erdrich. --This text refers to the hardcover edition.
- ASIN : B07TGFB1QR
- Publisher : Avid Reader Press / Simon & Schuster; Reprint edition (Jan. 21 2020)
- Language : English
- File size : 2267 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Not Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Print length : 332 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #680,558 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Top reviews from other countries
An impressive roster of writers
Chabon and Waldman have assembled an impressive roster of writers that includes some of our worthiest and most recognizable names. Among them are Viet Thanh Nguyen, Ann Patchett, Geraldine Brooks, Dave Eggers, Daniel Handler, Yaa Gyasi, Steven Okazaki, Elizabeth Strout, Jonathan Lethem, Salman Rushdie, Jennifer Egan, Scott Turow, Neil Gaiman, Jesmyn Ward, George Saunders, Anthony Doerr, Charlie Jane Anders, Andrew Sean Greer, and Louise Erdrich. Likewise, the readers include many marquee names from Hollywood as well as the literary community. Unfortunately, I can’t find anywhere a list of the readers. Nor, by the way, is there an accessible table of contents for any edition, except in print on the hardcover. I decline to spend another $16 for a copy.
Establishing legal precedents in landmark ACLU cases
Though necessarily episodic, The Fight of the Century encompasses many of the most important constitutional issues litigated in the course of the past century. Included are cases involving celebrated, landmark ACLU cases such as United States v. One Book Called Ulysses (1933), Roe v. Wade (1973), and Citizens United v. FEC (2010) as well as many that have established important legal precedents but are little remembered outside legal circles.
On the side of expanding our freedoms—almost all the time
The authors reflect on freedom of speech, racial inequality, abortion, gay and lesbian rights, and a long list of other issues that have raised the ire of liberals since the First World War. In almost every case, the ACLU has stood on the side of the angels, expanding human rights to reflect the growing diversity and tolerance of American society. Uniformly, the authors praise the ACLU lawyers who took on these often difficult cases. But there is one glaring exception.
The ACLU goes off the rails on Citizens United
In a powerful essay about the Citizens United decision, Scott Turow blasts the ACLU. Unaccountably, the organization treated the case as a test of the First Amendment, its signature issue. Turow’s essay, “Spending Money Isn’t Speech,” lacerates the logic that sent the ACLU careening off the deep end on this tragic miscarriage of justice. Turow is, after all, an attorney as well as an author, and I would find it hard to believe that he wouldn’t prevail in a courtroom presided over by a dispassionate judge. You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand when an advocate is employing what are often called “technicalities” to justify an unreasonable position. And that surely was the stance of the five Justices and the ACLU itself when they weighed in on the side of equating money with speech.
Yet in this compendium of landmark ACLU cases, the organization’s position on Citizens United is clearly an outlier. It’s hard for any civil libertarian to find fault with the ACLU’s work on any of the dozens of other cases explored in this collection.
1. The format is similar to "The End of Hunger" in that there are multiple writers rather than one. But what I like about this book is that unlike "The End of Hunger" it's very organized. Each writer gets a separate case they comment on and each case leads to the next case until we get to a present Pipeline Case that the ACLU is currently working on.
2. I like how there is such a variety in regards to the approach/style each writer chooses to take when analyzing their selected case. Some were personally involved/impacted with the case in some way so they tell their story, others get into the legal jargon (was great reading the "lawyer writers" who did this), others describe how one case impacts society as a whole, etc.
2A. These different styles stem from the fact that figures of a variety of fields were selected in a way. Sure all of them were writers but writers from different genres and some were/are lawyers, musicians, and filmmakers as well.
3. I like how A big-time lawyer and author in this book were allowed to argue against the ACLU for a particular case. I feel like his section showcased that the ACLU, like any other organization if you "look beyond the veal" is composed of fallible human beings that are capable of making wrong decisions.
1. I felt like some of the writers "flexed too much" or they tried to place as many big words as they could into one sentence just for the heck of it and you could tell.
1A. Some writers well..... "flexed too little" lol like they would just literally describe the case and what led up to the case and that's it like you could basically google the insight they provided, or maybe they googled, yourself.
2. The book needed more writers that are also lawyers and/or legal scholars. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed the historical insight and storytelling but certain cases needed individuals to dig up extra details and legal professionals are the best for that kind of thing.
3. Certain sections were way too long and I found myself reading half of those and skipping half of them. Additionally, in certain sections writers were either too biased (liberal) and/or failed to showcase why a particular narrowly applicable case should matter to me and what I should get from it personally so I skipped some of those sections in their entirety after a few pages in.