Because different agencies are responsible for each section, the organization and flow vary

from section to section. For example, the Labor Department’s employment tab has many links

under certain subsections, making navigation to the needed information burdensome. Several

dead links and links posted twice under the same subsection were noted. It was also unclear

why certain links were included in various subsections. Under the Self Determination section

there is a link to the Institute on Disability at the University of New Hampshire, but the

accompanying description gives no indication why it was included.

On the other hand, the income support tab was well laid out and easy to use, without an

overwhelming number of links for each subsection. For example, if a person needed

information on how to file for Social Security Disability (SSDI), they could click on the

Social Security Administration’s SSDI subsection and follow the links to learn about the

process. The first link was a Disability Planner to help applicants learn what benefits are

available, how to qualify, who is eligible to receive benefits, and how one collects once they

are approved. There are even links to apply online and check the process of one’s application.

In addition to the Disability Planner, there were links to benefits for children with disabilities,

information for the blind, how Social Security determines if one is disabled, and even the

medical criteria for determining a claim.

As gigantic as the site is, the search feature usually leads to the desired information.

Sample searches for ‘‘federal rental assistance’’ and ‘‘food stamps’’ led directly to the

information without guessing which category contained the subjects. Overall, the site is

uneven, with some sections more useful and organized than others. However, it does achieve

the stated goal of combining disability programs information from assorted government

agencies, as well as solid background information for researchers. It should be considered a

strong starting point in searching for federal disability information.

Claudene Sproles

Government Documents Reference Librarian,

University of Louisville, William F. Ekstrom Library,

2301 South Third Street, Louisville, KY 40292-0001, USA

E-mail address: caspro01@Louisville.edu

Fax: +1-502-852-8736

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.12.005

Marbury versus Madison: Documents and Commentary.

Mark A. Graber and Michael Perhac (Editors). Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002. viii, 424 pp.

$99.95 (cloth). ISBN 1-56802-719-2

Editors Mark A. Graber and Michael Perhac, respectively a political science professor and

a political science doctoral candidate at the University of Maryland College Park, have

collected nine original scholarly essays and one hundred historical documents for Marbury

Book reviews 241

versus Madison: Documents and Commentary. The book places the landmark legal decision

in both historical and contemporary context.

Approximately the first half of the book is made up of scholarly essays examining

Marbury from various perspectives. For example, the first essay, Scott Douglas Gerber’s

‘‘The Myth of Marbury v. Madison and the Origins of Judicial Review,’’ debunks the

commonly held view that Marbury v. Madison (1803) was the beginning of the idea of

judicial review. That essay traces the doctrine’s English origins to Sir Edward Coke’s

opinion in Dr. Bonham’s Case (1610) and also points to cases from colonial America such

as Paxton v. Gray (1761); Robin v. Hardaway (1772) and to the debates on ratification of

the Constitution. A later essay, Ran Hirschl’s ‘‘Beyond the American Experience: the

Global Expansion of Judicial Review,’’ describes the variety of judicial review practices

that have developed across the world with the spread of democratic governmental practices

in general. The essays are very readable and each concludes with a brief but useful

bibliography.

The second half of the book consists of excerpts from ninety-nine historical docu-

ments, some of which are referred to in the essays of the first half of the book, and

many of which demonstrate that judicial review is ancient and geographically diverse in

its antecedents. These documents include excerpts from the Code of Justinian (483–565

A.D.), which admonished judges to reject official government orders that are contrary to

‘‘the general law and public utility’’; and from Ghisilardi’s Case (1638), a case from

papal Italy which declared that certain legislative acts approved by two popes were

invalid because injured an individual’s ‘‘well-acquired right.’’ They also include excerpts

from numerous pre-Marbury American cases, the Constitutional ratification debates, and

many cases that later relied on Marbury. Most of the excerpts are unfortunately (but

necessarily) quite brief.

An appendix also reprints the full text of the original opinion, with annotations by Graber

and Perhac. The annotations are annoyingly placed in italics between paragraphs of original

text, rather than in footnotes. While a few of the annotations define legal terms or refer the

reader to some of the historical documents reprinted in the book for background, the majority

merely paraphrase or summarize the opinion paragraphs that precede them.

One very helpful feature of the book is an appendix citing all later Supreme Court cases

that cited Marbury between 1803 and June 2002. There is also a thorough subject index.

This book is recommended for use as supplemental reading in undergraduate political

science courses and for purchase by undergraduate libraries.

Sara Kelley

Research Librarian, University of Maryland School of Law,

Thurgood Marshall Law Library, Baltimore, MD 21201-1786, USA

E-mail address: skelley@law.umaryland.edu

doi:10.1016/j.giq.2003.12.006

Book reviews242