May It Please the Court: The Most Significant Oral Arguments Made Before the Supreme Court Since 1955

As other reviews note, this has only excerpts, not full arguments. The title and description should say so. The title says "audio tapes", but the description says "MP3 audio CD." Reviews show that some buyers received CDs. I received tapes. If it matters to you, it will be best to ask the seller. Whichever format you get, it is a good introduction to all these cases. On the other hand the full oral arguments of all cases since 1955, including these, are at Oyez:com. That site highlights each paragraph of the transcript in yellow while the recording plays it, and lights up a photo of each justice as s/he speaks.

Great insight into the court cases that invigorated the American experience. Should be read while listening to the CD of the actual presentation of arguments.

very important for law classes

Everything was delivered on time in great condition, with the audio cassettes too. The book is amazing--so detailed and makes the cases so real. Fantastic price too!

Great book...

What you see is not what you hear. It said cassette tapes but, I received a book.

I fully enjoyed this series and own each set. The first series has additional charm because of the nice packaging, which decreased in charm as later sets came out. The plastic display holder and hard cover companion book, including a transcript of each tape, is a nice touch.The sets does have a liberal slant, though not excessive, which reflects the author. [Justice Marshall gets some play a lot, but then again, his questions often tend to be entertaining.] This doesn't hurt too much, since the commentary is relatively brief, and centers largely on the facts of the case. And, the cases are generally landmark, not leaning one way or the other per se. Anyway, the first tape's "introduction to the Supreme Court" is well done.I don't find it too troubling that the book doesn't have the whole opinion. The book uses a typical "casebook" approach and prints important excerpts. The book would be much larger if the full opinions were printed. Nor do the excerpt style hurt too much, again it would take much more space to do so. For those interested, Jerry Goldman has a CD-ROM with complete orals of some cases. Or, the Oyez.com website.I must, however, note that Irons et. al. provided some sloppy editing, which he admitted to some degree later on. He has the "Reagan Administration" involved in a case before Reagan came to office. He has "Justice Marshall" asking a question in a case before he came to the Court. And, some substantive facts and explanations contain some errors. I'm not sure how some of these things were missed in editing.[I'd add that Edward Lazarus has been particularly critical of this series, including how the comments and editing slants the cases. He has a point, but it is probably exaggerated. Still, with many cases w/i the last twenty years in particular having transcripts, providing full arguments, this is something to keep in mind.]Nonetheless, overall, it is a very educational series. It further suggests why we should be able to hear these things on C-SPAN. [The US Supreme Court now provides same week audio of oral arguments on its website. See also, the Oyez website.]

These recordings are a great resources for anyone intersted in the US supreme court. This is probably doubly true as the nomination and approval process is upon us again. The records reveal much that is lost in a purely written transcript, which is the source of one of my misgivings of the packaging -- the companion book is nothing more than a literal transcription of the tapes. The book could have provided more background, or in-depth analysis, or a copy of the constitution, or the full text of the opinions. Sadly, it provides none of these.It is remarkable how the personal experiences of the various justices seem to color their opinions. Most interesting is when future Supremes appear before the court as attorneys.Finally, I find it interesting that the quality of the arguments seems to be independent of the decisions of the courts -- some of the weakest orators yielded winning arguments.Still, despite these misgivings, this provides a wonderful ear to the wall of the highest court in the land. Perhaps the best thing about these arguments is that they are completely accessible to the layman -- there is little legalisms, just big issues understandable by all, even if they are controversial.