#1 New York Times bestselling author Alan Dershowitz recounts his extraordinary coming of age in this legal autobiography, as well as the cases that have changed American jurisprudence over the past fifty years, most of which he has personally been involved in. “Overflowing with fascinating and funny vignettes involving his cases and clients, and probing and provocative insights into contemporary legal controversies.”— The Boston Globe Alan Dershowitz, the preeminent defense lawyer in America today, has been called the “winningest appellate criminal defense lawyer in history.” A professor at Harvard Law School since the age of twenty-five, he has led or been part of the defense team for such storied clients as Bill Clinton, Julian Assange, O. J. Simpson, Claus von Bülow, Mia Farrow, Jeffrey MacDonald, Patty Hearst, Mike Tyson, and countless others. In Taking the Stand, Dershowitz describes his evolution as a lawyer—from a C-minus student in Yeshiva High School to the youngest full professor in the history of Harvard Law School. In his #1 New York Times bestselling book Chutzpah, Alan described his Jewish life. In Taking the Stand, he looks at the people and events that have helped to shape his ideas about the law. He describes his formative years as a clerk for the United States Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. In the course of his career, he confronts the challenges of First Amendment law, the ongoing tension between individual freedom and national security, the questionable science often employed to prosecute accused murderers, the evolution of civil rights—and why the abortion rights debate in society hasn’t moved forward since Roe v. Wade . Filled with unforgettable cases and inside legal “baseball,” Taking the Stand is a deeply personal account of one of the legendary legal minds of our time.

Beautiful brand new paperback. Unread, no markings or wear of any kind. Our Family carefully packs each book in high-quality bubble lined, envelopes. We appreciate your business and welcome any questions

"In our current age of hyper-partisan politics, nearly everyone takes sides. This is especially true with regard to the Trump presidency. It has become difficult to have a reasonable discussion about the most controversial president in our recent history. For Trump zealots, their president has not only committed no crimes, he has done nothing wrong. For anti-Trump zealots, nothing Trump has done--even in foreign policy--is good. Everything he has done is wrong, and since it is wrong, it must necessarily be criminal. This deeply undemocratic fallacy--that political sins must be investigated and prosecuted as criminal--is an exceedingly dangerous trend. Hardening positions on both sides has been manifested by increasing demands to criminalize political differences. Both sides scream "lock 'em up" instead of making substantive criticisms of opposing views ... The vibrant center is weakening, with traditional liberalism and conservatism becoming further apart, not just in approach, but in their respect for Constitutional norms that have served us well for more than two centuries. While Donald Trump is not the only cause of this profound division, his election drew it to the surface and made it the dominant paradigm of political debate. Unless we as a nation begin to focus again on what unites us rather than on what divides us, America might not survive the next decade."--Publisher description.

The greatest danger the world faces in the twenty-first century is an Iranian nuclear arsenal. That is why decisions regarding Iran's nuclear program may be the most important of our time. The negotiations that led to this bad deal were deeply flawed. But it doesn't follow that the deal should be rejected by Congress. If the President is right that rejecting this deal will be worse than accepting, then he has put us in the terrible position of choosing between bad and worse. In The Case Against the Iran Deal: How Can We Stop Iran From Getting Nukes? , Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz evaluates the pros and cons of the Iran nuclear agreement. He asks the fundamental questions about what the deal means, how it will be implemented, and whether we now have the capacity to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. As a lawyer with decades of negotiation experience, and a regular commentator on Middle Eastern politics, Dershowitz explains how we could have gotten a better deal, and offers a unique analysis of the Obama administration's negotiations with Iran and the implications of a deal for Israel, the Middle East, and the global community. It is a call for both intelligent reflection and for determined action to stop Iran from getting the bomb. The clock is ticking. We must find ways to repair the damage this deal threatens to do. This book proposes solutions along with its constructive criticism.

Every so often, a startling book emerges that gives voice to a new of previously unexamined trend that is transforming society. In Preemption: A Knife That Cuts Both Ways, Alan M. Dershowitz, the renowned lawyer and educator, chronicles the world's fundamental shift in its approach to controlling dangerous and destructive human behavior. Dershowitz reveals that we are moving - whether in terms of fighting crime, profiling suspicious behavior, or combating terrorism - toward increasingly preventive and proactive measures and away from a traditional reliance on reactive responses. In showing the seismic shift that not only has profoundly altered foreign policy but also has affected matters as close to home as inoculation, Internet censorship, and stings, Dershowitz presents the reader with challenging dilemmas. For example, should one detain and interrogate a potential criminal solely on the basis of his profile, DNA, or predicted behavior? Should the Department of Homeland Security have the power to monitor law-abiding citizens just because they attend a certain mosque or church? Should a nation threatened by terrorism or nuclear attack be authorized to launch a preemptive attack or a preventive war? In presenting his finds, Dershowitz contrasts our approach to the Cold War - deterring a nuclear attack by threatening mutually assured destruction (MAD) - with our current approach to terrorism: kill them before they kill us. The tragic events of 9/11 have of course outwardly change the nature of American foreign policy, but Preemption convincingly demonstrated that the seeds were planted long before the collapse of the World Trade Towers and the deadly chain of al-Qaids bombings that have ripped through more than a dozen cities throughout the world. In tracing the emergence of a preemptive approach, particularly in this new century, Dershowitz examines the troubling implications not just for national security and foreign policy but for civil liberties and human rights as well. He calls for, and constructs, a new jurisprudence of preemption that seeks to balance security and freedom. With a remarkable flair for debate that has won him acclaim in the courtroom, Dershowitz brings his prodigious talen and firsthand expertise as lawyer to a topic of great philosophical and political import, The questions that he raises, both in his introduction and through the many lucid examples in Preemption, have already begun to define our age. In doing so, they will profoundly alter our fundamental understanding of how to confront crime, terrorism, and warfare. Indeed, the knife cuts both ways.