Allow Me to Retort is an easy to read book about the Constitution. It is very enlightening and thought provoking. I highly recommend this well written book.

I've followed Elie Mystal from Above the Law from years before. I am glad see his commentary on tv, twittter, and The Nation. I am glad I read Allow Me to Retort. This books breaks down why it is important to understand your rights. This is a must read.

The arguments for Constitutional originalism and absolutism are enshrouded in doublespeak and intentionally confusing verbal maneuverings that it becomes difficult to sustain reasoned and rational arguments in favor of civil and social rights. Conservative pundits have claimed moral and legal domain over the rights protected by the Constitution. To counter these arguments, Harvard Law graduate, legal commentator, and writer Elie Mystal has compiled a collection of essays centering on the experiences of disenfranchisement among women, people of color law, LGBTQIA+, and others from marginalized communities in Allow Me To Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution. Through a review of history and case law, Mystal shows evidence of a U.S. legal system built upon preserving patriarchy, heteronormativity, and White supremacy.

Mystal directly confronts the hypocrisy and fallacy of right-wing arguments regarding hot-button issues such as police brutality, cancel culture, the right to bear arms, reproductive rights, voter suppression, and more. True to his unapologetic MSNBC persona, Mystal does not mince words nor strike a conciliatory tone. He makes his argument in a cognitively accessible way and uses minimal legal jargon. He shares personal anecdotes about downright scary encounters with police, then spends a great deal of time breaking down Fourth Amendment to expose the flaws of legal arguments that uphold police brutality and White supremacy in law enforcement.

Mystal showcases his legal training and knowledge of case law to explain the historical civil, social, and political ramifications of interpretations of the law at the hands of racist judges. Despite the pervasive American myth of the objectivity of the law, Mystal proves that it is applied subjectively, often to benefit the status quo of White male hegemony. Anyone with a cursory interest in how the law and politics merge to uphold inequities would appreciate Mystal’s nuanced take on how the law has been weaponized against vulnerable communities.

An examination of the Constitution and the many conversations around “rights” broken down.
•
•
I’m not sure there is a book that is more necessary for understanding what is going on in political arenas across the US right now. I want to press this book into all of your hands. Mystal is such a gifted writer, he makes things I once thought were complicated seem obvious and logical. He deeply understands the laws and discourse and shares his wisdom and perspective as a Black man. He plainly (and frequently) calls out the deep seeded racism, homophobia, sexism, etc. that are embedded in the USA’s founding documents and fathers. The book is easy to read even if you’re not a nonfiction person or a law person. Mystal finds plenty of places to inject his humor and wit, while also maintaining the gravity of what the SCOTUS and law makers have done/are doing. If you’re trying to better understand the legality of gun control, Roe, police brutality, death penalty, voting rights, and even just broadly the idea of “rights” this book is for you. Trust me on this one.

Wow. "Allow Me to Retort" is probably one of the most important books you can read. Taking you through the history of our Constitution, Mystal breaks down the founding laws of our country and shows us the hypocrisy and weaponization of it. I learned a lot and got a renewed perspective on the issues the U.S. continues to face.

Highly relevant, Mystal explains the various issues with our Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the Supreme Court, government processes, and more. He highlights the history of our country and how certain groups throughout time have twisted and used the Constitution for their own interests. It's an invaluable piece of work in helping people understand the racism and misogyny this country was founded on.

Despite the book coming out prior to Roe v. Wade being overturned, his chapter on abortion is both relevant and eerie. I think this book can help a lot of people understand how we got to this point of ultra-conservatism and how we can overcome it. With splashes of wit and sarcasm, the author keeps you engaged and "dumbs down" the legal terms so anyone can fully absorb what he is trying to convey.

Could not have loved this more. Incredibly thought-provoking. Heavy and complex but endlessly readable, which is pretty damn impressive for a book about constitutional law.

I love his twitter feed and his book is just as hilarious. The conversational tone made it easy to understand complex legal problems and I loved how he made everything relevant to current issues.
Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for a free copy in exchange for my honest opinion.

Elie Mystal does a masterful takedown of the BS of modern conservatives' interpretation of the Constitution. Originalism is a scam. Big chunks of the Constitution ARE irredeemable racist BS. And Mystal pulls no punches in pointing it all out, in inimitable style. Allow Me to Retort should be mandatory reading for all high school history classes in the U.S.

To start off I am going to say that in most cases someone who is reading Allow Me to Retort is probably someone that already agrees with Mystal however it is still a very interesting read and a new perspective (at least to me) of the document this country was founded on.

In Allow Me to Retort, Mystal breaks down the amendments to the constitution and compares how originalist look at them and how he believes they should be viewed. In most cases Mystal's take is about the oppressive or racist origins of the amendment and how it should be looked and applied differently. His breakdown goes beyond race and includes all levels of oppression including against LGBTQ members and women. The thing to remember about the constitution is that it was a document written by land owning white men in the 1700's. These are men who owned slaves, did not view women as equals, and did not believe that poor white men should even have a say in their own governing. We often forget that the Bill of Rights are the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, that means that they immediately needed to make clarifications and adjustments the document they wrote which helps with the argument that this is a living, breathing documents that can and should be amended as needed to ensure that the ideal of "all men are created equal" is in fact the fundamental believe of this country and achieved.

Mystal spends time talking about the origins and history of amendments as clarification for what the goal of an originalist is when they look at these amendments. I found this book very accessible and enjoyed learning more about some of the amendments I did not know much about like the 9th and 10th amendments. I am a big believer in exposing oneself to various views and opinions and not just reinforcing the ones you already hold. While my overall opinions align with Mystal, his perspective allowed me to view our founding document in a way that I could not from personal experience as a white person. I would suggest this book to anyone if for no other reason than exposure to new ideas.

A brilliant legal mind, memorable provocative wit, and genuine to his core, Elie enlightens us like no other. This book is resourceful, much needed, and an exceedingly fun must-read.

I will be rereading this book. Why? Because it articulates arguments I need to have at the tip of my tongue when people defend legal decisions that clearly ensure not everyone is equally protected under our laws, that assume the Constitution is a perfect document instead of one that needs continuous amending, that creat or perpetuate a caste system. If you think the right people are on our Supreme Court right now, you’ll find this book offensive. If you prefer polite language, you may also be offended. But keep reading through each chapter, seeing if you can really argue with the arguments being made about where interpretation has gone wrong.

Thanks, NetGalley, for an advance copy in exchange for an unbiased review.

Elie Mystal doesn't hold any punches in his book, "Allow Me to Retort." These are issues and ideas that need to be discussed. Mystal offers an insightful, informative, witty discussion on why the Constitution is "trash". I was a little skeptical at first of his characterization, and I still think the document itself is and was an important document. However, as he has shown, the document was created by White men for mostly White men and in the wrong hands the document does not set out to do what it is supposed to do and that is create equality. Instead, mostly through the courts, they have corrupted the true intent of the document, or as Mystal would argue they do what exactly the White drafters intended. There have been many, many wrongs done over the years and it is time to help right those wrongs. Mystal gives some ways that he would help fix the system. I highly, highly recommend this book even if you don't agree with him. I'm sure you will learn something and it might just open your eyes to how broke our system is. It is a system we need to fix. I just hope it isn't too late.

Compelling and provoking Elie Mystal's commentary on the Constitution is not to be missed. Allow Me to Retort has a laser-focused perspective that is moving and brutal. Eye opening, but long-winded, it is worthy read.

The subtitle of the book tells you a bit about what the book is: "a Black Guy's Guide to the Constitution." Elie Mystal is a lawyer as well as author, justice correspondent for The Nation, and a commentator for MSNBC. He takes on a big task: to debunk the myth that the U.S. Constitution is infallible and inclusive. In reality, the document is a monument to preserve and maintain White supremacy at the expense of Black people (as well as other non-White people, but Mystal focuses mainly on Black people, and that is a big task). If you are stuck having to argue with some Republican/conservative about the "greatness" of the document, this book explains exactly why they are wrong most if not all of the time. So read this book and keep it handy.

The author writes in clear language. Legal terms are explained, but the legalese is fairly minimal. This is a book anyone can read and learn from it. Needless to say, some folks may not like being told the truth. Give them this book anyways; they need to read it then do their work.

Absolutely fascinating and the exact kind of book on constitutional law that I’ve been looking for. 'Allow Me to Retort' is a hilarious and accessible jumping-off point to more in-depth future reading.

If you aren't a bleeding-heart liberal, you probably won't truly enjoy this book. That said, the perspective it provides on the Constitution is valuable no matter what your political persuasion. Mystal makes the case that the Constitution, though it is relied on so heavily by politicians and judges, is problematic because it was written by white men in power in order to maintain their power and in the context of a country reliant on slave labor. The systemic racism that plagues today's United States, then, is very much a planned feature of our society rather than an accidental occurrence.

In this book, political commentator Elie Mystal takes on the U.S. Constitution, a document deeply flawed and entrenched in racism, but also frequently misunderstood. Looking at the Constitution from beginning to end, Mystal pushes back against conservative interpretations of the country's founders intentions and instead argues for a reading of the Constitution that works toward the nation's stated values. This certainly isn't a book designed to convince anyone on the far right, but I appreciate that honesty. Instead, Mystal focuses on how to push back against repressive, racist policies and political arguments. And at the same time, it's also deeply funny and so smart. I laughed out loud multiple times, which is something I didn't really expect from a book analyzing the Constitution!

A few housekeeping notes to start... Disclosure #1: I received a post-publication (pub. date January 11, 2022) review copy of this from the publisher The New Press through NetGalley. Disclosure #2: I don't watch news channels, lurk on the interweb pages of those channels save to read an article, "follow" any of the news personalities. I admit I have never heard of Mr. Mystal before reading this. I don't have a preconceived bias in that, however... Disclosure #3: Mr. Mystal's editorials do hit my confirmation biases ("If you go to a good school and have access to good professors and good books and you come out as a Republican, I’m prejudiced against you. I assume you’re defective, in some way." and "It’s a classic liberal mistake: conservatives used a tool for evil, so instead of using that same tool for good, let’s never use tools. Sometimes, I swear, it can seem like liberals spend all their time inventing ways to get their asses kicked."), and I can find little fault in his analyses.

Now... Mr. Mystal has a ax to grind. A big ax. A rightfully earned from experience, and unfortunately unjustly inherited, righteously indignant ax that makes Paul Bunyan's look like a campfire hatchet. And he drapes his analyses with language so colorful that Joseph abandoned his coat. "Everybody has seen the gleaming, air-brushed face of the Constitution. I’m going to tell you what this m**********r looks like after it has had its foot on your neck for almost 250 years." Nearly all of the people who need to read this book won't. And those who do need to and read it despite it rubbing their wrong positions raw with truth may not be able to get past the base, coarse no-f**ks-given gloves off Samuel L. Jackson assault on their senses in Mystal's dismantling of "conservative" arguments with respect to their defense of the Amendments. Note: that is one fault I do have: stop calling them "conservative" (I'm not partial to "liberal" anymore, either.) Mystal says

" The Constitution was so flawed upon its release in 1787 that it came with immediate updates. The first ten amendments, the “Bill of Rights,” were demanded by some to ensure ratif ication of the rest of the document. All of them were written by James Madison, who didn’t think they were actually necessary but did it to placate political interests. Video gamers would call the Bill of Rights a “day one patch,” and they’re a good indication that the developers didn’t have enough time to work out all the kinks. And yet conservatives use these initial updates to justify modern bigotry against all sorts of people."

(I tend to skip over the C-word in print... and cringe when I hear it... but I forgive those who use it, if they make good sense otherwise.) And Mystal also says: "My goal is to expose what the Constitution looks like from the vantage of a person it was designed to ignore. My goal is to illustrate how the interpretation of the Constitution that conservatives want people to accept is little more than intellectual front for continued white male hegemony." And, he is clear in

"The Constitution is not gospel, it's not magic, and it's not even particularly successful if you count one civil war, one massive minority uprising for justice that kind of worked against tons that have been largely rebuffed, and one failed coup led by the actual president, as “demerits.” It was written by a collection of wealthy slavers, wealthy colonizers, and wealthy antislavery white men who were nonetheless willing to compromise and profit together with the slavers and colonizers."

If you pay attention to history, particularly recent history, this book should hiss you off. Rather, the points made should. If the book does and you disagree with those points, well then there is no hope for you.

Bottom line: "Never accept the conservative interpretation of the Constitution. Never accept the conservative limitations placed on our political, civil, and social rights. They have literally always been wrong, and they are wrong now. Justice is not one constitutional option among many — it is a requirement of a free and equal society."

Too many notes. Selected soundbites:

"Madison put the Ninth Amendment in to counteract what he knew small- minded people would do to the rest of the document, and so small- minded conservatives have to pretend it’s not even there in order to achieve their goals of retarding progress." And "Unlike their stance on the Ninth Amendment, originalists pay a lot of attention to the Tenth Amendment." The Tenth is the one that ticks me off a lot.

On Miranda and why it is a poor band-aid (my term): "Your constitutional rights aren’t supposed to change depending on whether you know they exist." How does this not keep SCOTUS awake at night? Oh, yeah. "Conservative"

More Miranda: "Once the police recite the Miranda warnings, they are free to go back to lying, intimidating, and coercing confessions. This takes us right back to the idea of Fifth Amendment rights being a litmus test for legal education, instead of inalienable rights given to all regardless of their knowledge of the law."

And more: "There are too many people in law enforcement who treat the right against self-incrimination like a technical obstacle to overcome, instead of an ancient right that is not to be violated."

Juries: "I’m often surprised by how much faith people place in juries as a check on arbitrary, despotic uses of state power. I mean, do people just not know how arbitrarily despotic juries can be? I cannot reliably get a random sampling of twelve people to read a whole article before calling me an asshole based on my headline." Data show how easily influenced they are. Not to mention predisposition that is either not uncovered during voir dire, or deliberately included by the selecting attorney.

Voting rights: "It doesn’t matter if the conservatives call themselves Democrats (as they did after the Civil War) or Republicans (as they have since the New Deal or so). It doesn’t matter if the conservative legal theorists say they’re in favor of federalism or judicial restraint or originalism and textualism. Their goals are and have been the same no matter what they are calling themselves this morning. They want the right to vote to be limited to the people who agree with them. They want to exclude fairness from the question of due process." Harsh but true.

The context is too much to unpack here but he covers in lengthy detail how the Fourteenth Amendment has been under attack by SCOTUS since it was ratified.

" Despite all of the evidence that the people who wrote the Fourteenth Amendment did not at all intend to authorize interracial marriage, Calabresi argues that the “original public meaning” of the Fourteenth totally included the equal protection of marriage, because of the dictionary definition of the words used. That’s no different than looking up an eighteenth- century list of “punishments” and determining that since slavers used to shove fireworks up the backsides of misbehaving slaves and light them, that such a punishment is neither cruel nor unusual. But, this is what passes for intellectualism in the modern conservative movement."

About his own children: "I’ll keep trying to get them to think about rules substantively instead of procedurally. I’ll keep trying to make them into the kinds of people who are outraged at unfairness, instead of desensitized to the suffering of others. I’ll do whatever I can think of to make sure they grow up to be anything other than like Clarence Thomas." Thank you.

"Gun rights are not about self- defense. They literally never have been. Gun rights are about menacing, intimidating, and killing racial minorities, if necessary." Prove me wrong.

And a jumping off point: Find and read Jamal Greene's "How Rights Went Wrong".

Smart, well-researched, witty, (did I already say SMART?) book from am MSNBC contributor that I admire. This book is witty and has me laughing while reading about the author’s complex, nuanced takes on the Constitution. I ate up every page with a spoon. Current in examples, I was able to learn so much I didn’t know while feeling I had someone out there who has the same beliefs I do. There was a lot of highlighting as I read. This would be an excellent book discussion choice - so much to discuss! Heartfelt thanks to The New Press for the advanced copy. Highly recommend!

Thanks in advance to NetGalley & New Press for the opportunity to read an advance copy of this book.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. Prior to reading this book, I thought I knew a lot about the US Constitution & the laws in this country. In the last several years, I have found myself becoming a history buff. This book was very eye-opening. Mystal used candor & wit to tackle a deep topic. As a result of reading this book, I have a deeper understanding of our Constitution & our legal system. I have often heard elections have consequences, Mystal beautifully explains how these consequences impact large segments of our population.

We need more books like this. Often, books on this subject tend to be dry & boring. Not this book! Mystal breaks things down in a simple & easy to understand manner. I highly recommend this book!