New Releases by Alan Dershowitz

President Donald Trump has declared war against elite American universities, such as Harvard, and has threatened to cut off federal funding, end tax exemptions, and limit foreign student visas. Harvard has filed lawsuits and threatened additional legal action. The nation is deeply divided over this conflict. How should Americans who care deeply about universities, about antisemitism, and about the proper role of government respond to this dangerous rift? Alan Dershowitz poses four basic questions about the decision whether to defund or otherwise punish universities that discriminate against—or apply a double standard to—Jews as victims of discrimination. Is it ever permissible, as a matter of policy and academic freedom, to weaponize governmental funding of universities in an effort to influence their policies? Is it constitutional or otherwise legal to cut off governmental funding based on the content of university speech or policies? Is the Trump administration justified in defunding universities such as Harvard and Columbia for their failures to deal effectively with growing antisemitism on their campuses? Can the government deny student (or faculty) visas to individuals who advocate or promote antisemitism or other actions that violate American policies? Among the reforms Dershowitz advocates are a return to meritocratic admissions and hiring; a return to rigorous blind grading; the end of the non-meritocratic diversity, equity, and inclusion bureaucracies; the application of a single standard of free speech, academic freedom, and discipline; and the end of ethnic, gender, regional, religious, sexual preference, and other identity-based departments, studies, programs, and other advocacy centers that have become incubators for anti-Jewish bigotry.

"You shall thank Alan Dershowitz for writing this [valuable] book." —Stephen Breyer, Former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court If reliable but uncertain intelligence predicted a mass casualty terrorist attack and indicated likely suspects, what preventive actions would be constitutionally authorized? Detention? Interrogation? Torture? What if the attack involved a weaponized virus? Should the government compel widespread inoculation that might kill hundreds of people while saving millions? What if an article describing how to circumvent the inoculation mandate was about to be published? Should censorship of the article be authorized? These are the sorts of questions Alan Dershowitz has been asking for more than 60 years, in his teaching, writing, and litigation. Now, at age 86, he has written his magnum opus. In it, he suggests an overarching jurisprudential framework that would set limits to the ballooning power of what he calls “the preventive state.” This important book offers unprecedented insights into one of the most underexamined developments of our age: the growing magnitude and frequency of cataclysmic threats, coupled with the increasingly effective—but increasingly intrusive—tools intended to predict and prevent them. Dershowitz responds to the urgent need for a jurisprudence that provides balance and accountability as both dangers and preventive capabilities increase, threatening our security and our liberties. This masterful analysis should be read by everyone who cares about security, liberty, and democracy.

Palestinianism is not only the newest manifestation of anti-Semitism; it also poses grave threats to peace, human rights, and democratic values. Its dangers must be exposed and challenged in the marketplace of ideas. It is the purpose of this book to pose that challenge and to put Palestinianism on trial for the moral crimes of bigotry, incitement to violence, and destroying any prospects for peace. By “Palestinianism,” Alan Dershowitz does not mean merely supporting a Palestinian state or the rights and well-being of the Palestinian people. Those are entirely reasonable positions to take. He means only the obsessive focus on the claims of Palestinians and their supporters—to the exclusion or minimization of the claims of other, more deserving, groups. This singular focus on the “rights” of Palestinians is coupled with an equivalent singular focus on the alleged “wrongs” of only one country—Israel, the nation-state of the Jewish people. It is the coupling of these biases that constitutes the new “Palestinianism” that we are now experiencing on university campuses, in international organizations, among hard-left politicians, and in many media. In Palestinianism, Dershowitz explores the sources of contemporary Jew-hatred, Israel demonization, and other threats to Jewish communities around the world. He demonstrates why he believes things are likely to get worse, as they did in Germany during the late 1930s. He does not believe they will culminate in another genocidal holocaust but that when the young bigots who so fervently rally behind Palestinianism grow into influential adults, they will increase the hatred against Jews and their nation-state. He argues that Jews and their state must become more self-reliant, and less dependent on the approval, support, or selection by others.

The goal of The Ten Big Anti-Israel Lies: And How to Refute Them with Truth is to contribute to the marketplace if ideas by offering truthful and well-documented facts that disprove the defamatory fictions—the big lies—that are pervasive in the current protests against Israel. The book’s intended audiences are open-minded students and others who seek to hear fact-based information on all sides of the relevant issues. It is also designed to provide intellectual ammunition to pro-Israel students who seek to engage in exchanges with their anti-Israel interlocutors. It is hoped that this book, will help promote fact-based debate and dialogue about Israel and its enemies. As a lifelong Zionist and supporter—though often a critical supporter—of Israel, I am convinced that the unvarnished truth about all sides of the conflict will, if fairly assessed, refute the blood libels currently directed at the nation-state of the Jewish people. This book will demonstrate that the vast majority of accusations leveled by the anti-Israel protestors and professors are false. I will describe their ten central accusations about the past, the present, and the future, and then refute them with indisputable documentary, historical, and empirical evidence.

In War on Woke: Why the New McCarthyism Is More Dangerous Than the Old, Alan Dershowitz—#1 New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—warns of the danger to the future of civil liberties and equality in America. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. War on Woke exposes new McCarthyite tendencies and tactics of academia, the media, and the business community, especially high tech, that promote closed-minded intolerance. Dershowitz explains that the new woke McCarthyism challenges the basic tenets of the classic liberal (in the traditional sense) state: Freedom of expression; due process; presumption of innocence, right to counsel, equal application of the law; tolerance and respect for differing viewpoints, and that these bedrock principles are rejected by McCarthyite extremists on both the hard left and the hard right. Analyzing the impact of this new woke McCarthyism through the relentless attempts to “get” Trump, the attention on the Bidens, and even its international manifestation relative to anti-Semitism, Israel, and the world, Dershowitz investigates the role of media and asks whether the US Supreme Court can constrain this growing threat as new woke McCarthyism becomes mainstream Americanism—especially as the current generation of students and young professionals become our political, media, business, educational, religious, and “influencer” leaders.

In War Against the Jews: How to End Hamas Barbarism, Alan Dershowitz—#1 New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—explains why the horrific attack of Oct 7 and Israel’s just response changes everything. It has changed the relationship between Israel and the United States, especially with regard to the possibility of direct American intervention. It has required Israel to consider its nuclear option as a last resort to assure its survival. It has revealed dangerous attitudes among America’s future leaders on today’s college campuses toward Israel’s possible destruction. It has exposed media biases that have been exacerbated with Israel’s vulnerabilities. It has united Israelis and Jews around the world as never before, despite the deep divisions among them politically, religiously, and ideologically. Nothing will ever be the same. It has clouded the future of peace between Israel and its Arab and Muslim neighbors and has diminished the proposals for a peaceful resolution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It has made predictions about the future of the region nearly impossible, except that imposing instability is inevitable. In this short book, Dershowitz analyzes these transforming events and suggests how to move forward.

In Dershowitz on Killing: How the Law Decides Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—examines the subjects of death, life, and the law. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. His legal career as a criminal defense lawyer has been deeply involved with death and life decisions. Dershowitz on Killing is a timely examination of issues and questions that are front and center in today’s society. Employing a philosophical, moral, religious, and cultural lens to the legal aspects surrounding death and life, Dershowitz elucidates the role of government to determine who shall live and who shall die in declaring wars, ordering executions, authorizing deadly force, permitting or denying abortions, providing or mandating vaccines, controlling climate change, allowing or refusing asylum for endangered migrants, and other life and death rulings. He notes that when the government decides these choices, it is asked to do so by first determining whether a “right” is involved, because rights trump mere interest, just as constitutional restrictions trump legislative and executive actions. Dershowitz on Killing asserts that the rules governing death and life decisions should reflect the irreversibility of death. It is essential reading for anyone interested in or concerned about how these decisions are allocated among state and federal; executive, legislative, and judicial; private and governmental; religious and secular institutions—and how people in a democracy, through the power of the ballot, have the ultimate say in these critical decisions.

In Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law, Alan Dershowitz—#1 New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—analyses the unremitting efforts by political opponents of Donald Trump to “get” him—to stop him from running in 2024—at any cost. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Get Trump makes clear that unconstitutional efforts to stop Trump from retaking the presidency challenge the very foundations of our liberty: due process, right to counsel, and free speech. Those who justify these dangerous departures from the rule of law argue that the threat posed by a second Trump presidency is “different” and “immediate,” while the departures from constitutional norms are longer term and more abstract. Dershowitz explains that defenders of Trump’s constitutional rights—even those like him who oppose Trump politically—are sought to be silenced; their free speech rights attacked, their integrity questioned, and their careers threatened. Much of the media substitutes advocacy against Trump for objective reporting, while many in academia petition and propagandize against rights they previously valued—all in the interest of getting Trump. The essence of justice is that it must be equally applicable to all, Dershowitz notes. No one is above the law but digging to find crimes in order to influence an election does not constitute the equal application of the law. In order to assure equal application in comparable situations, he proposes two criteria for indicting a likely candidate of the opposing party: the Richard Nixon standard and the Hillary Clinton standard—and most recently, the Joe Biden standard. Get Trump warns that regardless of whether this anti-democratic effort to stop Trump from running succeeds or fails, it is likely to create dangerous precedents that will lie around like loaded weapons ready to be deployed against other controversial candidates, officials, or citizens about whom it can be argued that the danger they pose “is different.”

In his fiftieth book, The Price of Principle: Why Integrity Is Worth the Consequences, Alan Dershowitz—#1 New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most influential legal scholars—explores the implications of the increasing tendency in politics, academia, media, and even the courts of law to punish principle and reward partisan hypocrisy. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico, and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet, he has come under intense criticism for living by his principles and applying his famed “shoe on the other foot test.” The Price of Principle is about efforts to cancel Alan Dershowitz and his career because he has insisted on sticking to his principles instead of choosing sides in the current culture and political war dividing our country. He explains that principled people are actively punished for not being sufficiently partisan. Principle has become the vice and partisanship the virtue in an age when partisan ends justify unprincipled means, such as denial of due process and free speech in the interest of achieving partisan or ideological goals. Throughout his narrative, Dershowitz focuses on three sets of principles that have guided his life: 1) freedom of expression and conscience; 2) due process, fundamental fairness, and the adversary system of seeking justice; and 3) basic equality and meritocracy. He documents the attacks on him and others like him for being “guilty” of refusing to compromise important principles to promote partisanship. He names names and points fingers of accusation at those who have led us down this dangerous road. In the end, The Price of Principle represents an icon in the defense of free speech and due process reckoning with the challenges of unprincipled attacks—a new brand of McCarthyism—and insisting that we ask hard questions about our own moral principles.

In The Case for Vaccine Mandates, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—makes an argument, against the backdrop of ideologically driven and politicized objections, for mandating (with medical exceptions) vaccinations as a last resort, if proved necessary to prevent the spread of COVID. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. He is also a fair-minded and even-handed expert on civil liberties and constitutional rights, and in this book offers his knowledge and insight to help readers understand how mandated vaccination and compulsion to wearing masks should and would be upheld in the courts. The Case for Vaccine Mandates offers a straightforward analytical perspective: If a vaccine significantly reduces the threat of spreading a serious and potentially deadly disease without significant risks to those taking the vaccine, the case for governmental compulsion grows stronger. If a vaccine only reduces the risk and seriousness of COVID to the vaccinated person but does little to prevent the spread or seriousness to others, the case is weaker. Dershowitz addresses these and the issue of masking through a libertarian approach derived from John Stuart Mill, the English philosopher and political economist whose doctrine he summarizes as, “your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.” Dershowitz further explores the subject of mandates by looking to what he describes as the only Supreme Court decision that is directly on point to this issue; decided in 1905, Jacobson v. Massachusetts involved a Cambridge ordinance mandating vaccination against smallpox and a fine for anyone who refused. In the end, The Case for Vaccine Mandates represents an icon in American law and due process reckoning with what unfortunately has become a reflection of our dangerously divisive age, where even a pandemic and the responses to it, divide us along partisan and ideological lines. It is essential reading for anyone interested in a non-partisan, civil liberties, and constitutional analysis.

In The Case Against the New Censorship: Protecting Free Speech from Big Tech, Progressives, and Universitiesu200b, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—analyzes the current regressive war against freedom of speech being waged by well-meaning but dangerous censors and proposes steps that can be taken to defend, reclaim, and strengthen freedom of speech and other basic liberties that are under attack. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. He is also a fair-minded and even-handed expert on the Constitution and our civil liberties, and in this book offers his knowledge and insight to help readers understand the war being waged against free speech by the ostensibly well-meaning forces seeking to constrain this basic right. The Case Against the New Censorship is an analysis of every aspect of the current fight against freedom of speech, from the cancellations and deplatformings practiced by so-called progressives, to the powerful, seemingly arbitrary control exerted by Big Tech and social media companies, to the stifling of debate and controversial thinking at public and private universities. It assesses the role of the Trump presidency in energizing this backlash against basic liberties and puts it into a broader historical context as it examines how anti-Trump zealots weaponized, distorted, and weakened constitutional protections in an effort to “get” Trump by any means. In the end, The Case Against the New Censorship represents an icon in American law and politics exploring the current rapidly changing attitudes toward the value of free speech and assessing potential ways to preserve our civil liberties. It is essential reading for anyone interested in or concerned about freedom of speech and the efforts to constrain it, the possible effects this could have on our society, and the significance of both freedom of speech and the battle against it in a greater historical and political context.

In Cancel Culture, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—makes an argument for free speech, due process, and restraint against the often overeager impulse to completely cancel individuals and institutions at the ever-changing whims of social media-driven crowds. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under intense criticism for his steadfast and consistent championing of those same principles, and his famed “shoe‑on‑the‑other‑foot test,” to those who have been “cancelled” for any number of faults, both real and imagined. Cancel Culture is a defense of due process, free speech, and even-handedness in the application of judgment. It makes the case for restraint and care in decisions about whom and what to cancel, boycott, deplatform, and bar from public life, and offers recommendations for when, why, and to what degree these steps may be appropriate, as long as objective, fair-minded criteria can be determined and met. While Dershowitz argues against the worst excesses of cancel culture—the rush to judgment and the devastating results it can have on those who may be innocent, the power of social media to effect punishment without a thorough examination of evidence, the idea that historical events can be viewed through the same lens as actions in the present day—he also acknowledges that its defenders ostensibly try to use it to create meaningful, positive change, and notes that cancelling may itself be a constitutionally protected form of free speech. In the end, Cancel Culture represents an icon in the defense of free speech and due process reckoning with the greatest challenge and threat to these rights since the rise of McCarthyism. It is essential reading for anyone interested in or concerned about cancel culture, its effects on our society, and its significance in a greater historical and political context.

The celebrity lawyer and #1 New York Times bestselling author of The Case Against Impeaching Trump offers his analysis of the 2016 presidential election. In the months before the 2016 election, 81 percent of voters said they''d "feel afraid" if either Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton took office—and yet, those were the choices. The American electorate was plagued by a widespread feeling of impotence. And yet, it was one of the most important elections in generations. In Electile Dysfunction, Harvard Law professor and frequent Fox News commentator Alan Dershowitz looks at what was at stake—with political extremism on the rise abroad and civil discourse on the decline in the US. He then assesses how each candidate related to basic domestic and foreign policy values

“Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else.”—Politico In The Case for Liberalism in an Age of Extremism, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—makes a classical liberal argument for centrist government in the US, as the Founding Fathers and the Constitution intended. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under intense criticism for his consistent classical liberalism in the face of a rapidly polarizing political landscape and for his steadfast support of centrist governance over either “progressive” or reactionary radicalism. The Case for Liberalism in an Age of Extremism is a defense of liberalism and its renewed relevance today. It makes the case for classic liberal values and programs over radical-left and reactionary right-wing agendas, and for centrism over extremism in general, showing why the United States has thrived throughout history because of its enduringly centrist base. It seeks to restore contemporary liberalism to its important place in the American political landscape, and attempts to persuade centrists from both the left and right—who may today call themselves progressives or moderate conservatives—that they, too, belong in the big tent of centrist liberalism. As a professor for half a century, Dershowitz never told students what values to accept or which candidates to support, but helped guide them to conclusions based on their own sets of values. He does the same in this book. A guide for all readers, rather than a piece of political advocacy for one party or another, The Case for Liberalism in an Age of Extremism is Alan Dershowitz’s argument for classical liberal values and their role in forming just societies and protecting against the dangers of extremism, just as they must today. It is essential reading for anyone interested in or concerned about political polarization on both the far-right and -left, and for everyone seeking a middle path between the extremes.

“Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else.”—Politico In Defending the Constitution, Alan Dershowitz—New York Times bestselling author and one of America’s most respected legal scholars—makes an impassioned constitutional argument against the impeachment of President Donald Trump, just as he delivered it to the United States Senate. Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under intense criticism fire for applying those same principles, and his famed “shoe‑on‑the‑other‑foot test,” to Donald Trump, especially after arguing on the president’s behalf before the U.S. Senate as it deliberated impeachment. Defending the Constitution seeks to refocus the debate over impeachment to the same standard that Dershowitz has upheld for decades: the law of the United States of America, as established by the Constitution. Citing legal examples from a long lineage of distinguished judges and attorneys, and examining the impeachment language in the Constitution itself, Dershowitz proves—first to the U.S. Senate, and now to readers everywhere—that President Trump should not have been impeached, and certainly should not be removed, for causes that do not meet the standards laid out by the founding fathers. This book is Alan Dershowitz’s argument for a return to nonpartisan judgment based on the Constitution, for a preservation of the separation of powers and the checks and balances that make American government great. It is essential reading for anyone interested in or concerned about the impeachment of President Trump, and for everyone who cares about the future of U.S. government and society.

A Wall Street Journal bestseller! Alan Dershowitz, one of America’s most respected legal scholars and a New York Times bestselling author proves—with incontrovertible evidence—that he is entirely innocent of the sexual misconduct accusations against him, while suggesting a roadmap for how such allegations should be handled in a just society. “Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else.”—Politico Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under intense criticism for applying those same principles, and his famed “shoe‑on‑the‑other‑foot test,” to those accused of sexual misconduct. In Guilt by Accusation, Dershowitz provides an in‑depth analysis of the false accusations against him, alongside a full presentation of the exculpatory evidence that proves his account, including emails from his accuser and an admission of his innocence from her lawyer, David Boies. Additionally, he examines current attitudes toward accusations of sexual misconduct, which are today, in the age of #MeToo, accepted as implicit truth without giving the accused a fair chance to defend themselves and their innocence, and suggests possible pathways back to a society and legal system in which due process is respected above public opinion and the whims of social media mobs. This book is Alan Dershowitz’s plea for fairness for both accuser and accused, his principled stand for due process no matter the allegation, and his compelling assertion of his own innocence. It is essential reading for anyone who wants to know the inside story behind the accusations against him or who cares about the current societal debate over how we should handle accusations of sexual misconduct. The #MeToo movement has generally been a force for good, but as with many good movements, it is being exploited by some bad people for personal profit. Supporters of the #MeToo movement must not allow false accusers to hurt real victims by hiding behind its virtuous shield, turning it into an exploitive sword against innocent people.

NOW A NEW YORK TIMES, WASHINGTON POST, WALL STREET JOURNAL, USA TODAY, AND PUBLISHERS WEEKLY BESTSELLER. There has never been a more important political investigation than Robert S. Mueller III''s into President Donald Trump''s possible collusion with Russia. His momentous findings can be found here, complete with: The 300+ pages of the historic report, as released by the Justice Department An introduction by constitutional scholar, eminent civil libertarian, and New York Times bestselling author Alan Dershowitz. The relevant portions of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the 1999 provisions written by former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, which establish and regulate the powers of the special counsel. Rod Rosenstein’s 2016 order appointing Robert Mueller III as special counsel and outlining the scope of his investigation. Attorney General William Barr’s four-page summary of the report, as sent to Congress. Barr''s explanation of the four reasons for redacting the report, and a key for identifying them in the color-coded report The wait is over. Robert Mueller, a lifelong Republican, has concluded his investigation and submitted its findings to Attorney General William Barr. Barr has told Congress that Mueller found no proof of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and did not come to a conclusion on obstruction of justice—neither concluding the president committed a crime nor exonerating him. But Mueller’s report was over 300 pages and Barr’s summary was only four pages, raising questions about the conclusions of a historic investigation. Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s probe into Russian influence on the 2016 election of Donald Trump—including links between the campaign and Russian interests, obstruction of justice by President Trump, and any other matters that may have arisen in the course of the investigation—has been the focal point of American politics since its inception in May 2017. Democrats in the US House of Representatives hoped to use the report to begin impeachment proceedings, with the support of those critical of the president. Media tracked Mueller’s every move, and the investigation was subject to constant speculation by political pundits everywhere. It resulted in the indictments of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and many others. President Trump and his supporters affirmed that the investigation was a “witch hunt” and the product of a plot by the political establishment—the “deep state”—to delegitimize his presidency. Mueller’s findings—at least according to Barr—allowed the latter to claim victory. But now, thanks to a subpoena from House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler for the full report, a resolution from the House of Representatives to release the full report to the public (though blocked in the Senate by Mitch McConnell), and popular demand, it’s time for public to judge if that is true. The Mueller investigation will join Watergate, and the Mueller Report will join the 9/11 Commission Report, the Warren Report, and the Starr Report, as one of the most important in history. The Mueller Report is required reading for everyone with interest in American politics, for every 2016 and 2020 voter, and every American. It’s now available here as an affordable paperback, featuring an introduction from eminent civil libertarian, Harvard Law Professor Emeritus, and New York Times bestselling author Alan Dershowitz, who provides a constitutional, civil law-based commentary sorely needed in today’s media landscape.

New York Times bestselling author! One of America’s most respected legal scholars—a Democrat—explains why impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump would be a bad idea for America. In the 2018 New York Times bestseller The Case Against Impeaching Trump, Alan Dershowitz lamented how American political discourse has devolved into hypocrisy and the criminalization of political differences in the rush to impeach President Trump. Arguments to impeach Trump failed Dershowitz’s “shoe on the other foot test,” or his political golden rule: Democrats must do unto Republicans what they would have Republicans do unto them, and vice versa. Since then, we’ve only become more divided—and the impeachment power wielded by the Democratic majority in the House of Representative threatens to further polarize the country. The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump includes and expands upon Dershowitz’s 2018 book. It puts recent political events, including the hyper-partisan Kavanaugh hearings, the unrestrained power of the Mueller investigation, and the generally intolerant current political discourse, into context. American democracy, Dershowitz argues, is suffering from political hypocrisy. And two years of impeachment proceedings brought by the House, and the media circus that would undoubtedly surround them, is clearly not the answer. This book is Alan Dershowitz’s plea for honest dialogue, for arguments that would be made even if the shoe was on the other foot.

"A brilliant lawyer...A new and very important book. I would encourage all people...to read!"—President Donald J. Trump “Absolutely amazing…. If you care about justice...read this book.”—Sean Hannity “Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else.”—Politico Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under partisan fire for applying those same principles to Donald Trump during the course of his many appearances in national media outlets as an expert resource on civil liberties and constitutional law. The Case Against Removing Trump seeks to reorient the debate over impeachment to the same standard that Dershowitz has continued to uphold for decades: the law of the United States of America, as established by the Constitution. In the author’s own words: “In the fervor to impeach President Trump, his political enemies have ignored the text of the Constitution. As a civil libertarian who voted against Trump, I remind those who would impeach him not to run roughshod over a document that has protected us all for two and a quarter centuries. In this case against impeachment, I make arguments similar to those I made against the impeachment of President Bill Clinton (and that I would be making had Hillary Clinton been elected and Republicans were seeking to impeach her). Impeachment and removal of a president are not entirely political decisions by Congress. Every member takes an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution sets out specific substantive criteria that MUST be met. I am thrilled to contribute to this important debate and especially that my book will be so quickly available to readers so they can make up their own minds.”

“This brand new book by Professor Dershowitz is absolutely amazing….If you care about justice and the President with the witch hunt, you’re going to want to read this book.”—Sean Hannity “Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else.”—Politico Alan Dershowitz has been called “one of the most prominent and consistent defenders of civil liberties in America” by Politico and “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights” by Newsweek. Yet he has come under partisan fire for applying those same principles to Donald Trump during the course of his many appearances in national media outlets as an expert resource on civil and constitutional law. The Case Against Impeaching Trump seeks to reorient the debate over impeachment to the same standard that Dershowitz has continued to uphold for decades: the law of the United States of America, as established by the Constitution. In the author’s own words: “In the fervor to impeach President Trump, his political enemies have ignored the text of the Constitution. As a civil libertarian who voted against Trump, I remind those who would impeach him not to run roughshod over a document that has protected us all for two and a quarter centuries. In this case against impeachment, I make arguments similar to those I made against the impeachment of President Bill Clinton (and that I would be making had Hillary Clinton been elected and Republicans were seeking to impeach her). Impeachment and removal of a president are not entirely political decisions by Congress. Every member takes an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution sets out specific substantive criteria that MUST be met. I am thrilled to contribute to this important debate and especially that my book will be so quickly available to readers so they can make up their own minds.”

Nineteen times, death penalty defense lawyer Andrea D. Lyon has represented a client found guilty of capital murder. Nineteen times, she has argued for that individual''s life to be spared. Nineteen times, she has succeeded. Dubbed the ''Angel of Death Row'' by the Chicago Tribune, Lyon was the first woman to serve as lead attorney in a death penalty case. Throughout her career, she has defended those accused of heinous acts and argued that, no matter their guilt or innocence, they deserved a chance at redemption. Now, for the first time, Lyon shares her story, from her early work as a Legal Aid attorney to her founding of the Center for Justice in Capital Cases. Full of courtroom drama, tragedy, and redemption, Angel of Death Row is a remarkable inside look at what drives Lyon to defend those who seem indefensible and to win. There was Annette who was suspected of murdering her own daughter. There was Patrick, the convicted murderer who thirsted for knowledge and shared his love of books with Lyon when she visited him in jail. There was Lonnie, whose mental illness made him nearly impossible to save until the daughter who remembered his better self spoke on his behalf. There was Deirdre, who shared Lyon''s cautious optimism that her wrongful conviction would finally be overturned, allowing her to see her grandchildren born while she was in prison. And there was Madison Hobley, the man whose name made international headlines when he was wrongfully charged with the murder of his family and sentenced to death. These clients trusted Lyon with their stories and their lives. Driven by an overwhelming sense of justice, fairness, and morality, she fought for them in the courtroom and in the raucous streets, staying by their sides as they struggled through real tragedy and triumphed in startling ways. Angel of Death Row is the compelling memoir of Lyon''s unusual journey and groundbreaking career.

The New York Times–bestselling author “has focused his internationally recognized expertise and clarity of vision on . . . this evolving terrorist tactic” (Benjamin Netanyahu). At a time when Israel is under persistent attack—on the battlefield, by international organizations, and in the court of public opinion—Alan Dershowitz presents a powerful case for Israel’s just war against terrorism. In the spirit of his international bestseller, The Case for Israel, Dershowitz shows why Israel’s struggle against Hamas is a fight not only to protect its own citizens, but for all democracies. The nation-state of the Jewish people is providing a model for all who are threatened by terrorist groups—such as ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram. Having himself been in one of the Hamas terror tunnels, Dershowitz explains why Israel had no choice but to send in ground troops to protect its civilians against Hamas death squads. Dershowitz wrote this book to warn the world that unless Hamas’s strategy of building terror tunnels and firing rockets from behind human shields is denounced and stopped—by the international community, the media, the academy, and good people of all religions, ethnicities, and nationalities—it will be coming soon “to a theater near you.” Covering all the hot-button issues—from the BDS movement, to the rise of anti-Semitism, to the charge of war crimes, to the prospects of peace—Terror Tunnels: The Case for Israel’s Just War Against Hamas is a must-read for all who care about Israel, peace in the Mideast, human rights, and fairness.

Defense attorney and Harvard law professor provides an insider''s account of the trial, appeal, subsequent retrial, and acquittal in the murder case of Claus von Bulow, profiling the people involved. NOTE: This edition does not include photographs.

The esteemed Harvard lawyer describes his career and the cases that have changed American jurisprudence throughout the past half century, discussing his early academic struggles, his clerking work for Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, and his role in many prominent cases.

"Anyone interested in the true merits of criminal law and very fine writing must read Alan Dershowitz''s book." --Truman Capote In this tell-all legal memoir, Alan Dershowitz describes his most famous, and infamous, cases and clients. In the process, takes a critical, informed look at a legal system that he regards as deeply corrupt.

In The Case for Peace, Dershowitz identifies twelve geopolitical barriers to peace between Israel and Palestine–and explains how to move around them and push the process forward. From the division of Jerusalem and Israeli counterterrorism measures to the security fence and the Iranian nuclear threat, his analyses are clear-headed, well-argued, and sure to be controversial. According to Dershowitz, achieving a lasting peace will require more than tough-minded negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. In academia, Europe, the UN, and the Arab world, Israel-bashing and anti-Semitism have reached new heights, despite the recent Israeli-Palestinian movement toward peace. Surveying this outpouring of vilification, Dershowitz deconstructs the smear tactics used by Israel-haters and shows how this kind of anti-Israel McCarthyism is aimed at scuttling any real chance of peace.

The Case for Israel is an ardent defense of Israel''s rights, supported by indisputable evidence. Presents a passionate look at what Israel''s accusers and detractors are saying about this war-torn country. Dershowitz accuses those who attack Israel of international bigotry and backs up his argument with hard facts. Widely respected as a civil libertarian, legal educator, and defense attorney extraordinaire, Alan Dershowitz has also been a passionate though not uncritical supporter of Israel.

Israel is seriously under attack from political, academic, religious, and military enemies, who are making vociferous threats against its continued existence. In this important new book, Dershowitz gives pro-Israel supporters the ammunition necessary to defend themselves.

The Declaration of Independence as you''ve never seen it before Some of us cherish it with near-scriptural reverence. Others simply take it for granted. In this contentious new look at the Declaration of Independence, however, celebrated attorney Alan Dershowitz takes "America''s birth certificate" and its principal author, Thomas Jefferson, to task. Dershowitz searches for the sources, history, and underlying reasoning that produced the Declaration and its particular language, from its reference to the "Laws of Nature and Nature''s God" through the long list of complaints against the abuses of King George III. He points out contradictions within the document, notes how the meanings of Jefferson''s words have changed over the centuries, and asks many disturbing questions, including: Where do rights come from? Do we have "unalienable rights"? Do rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" have any meaning? How could slaveowners claim to believe that "all men are created equal"? Is the God of the Declaration the God of the Bible? Does the Declaration establish a Christian State? Are there "Laws of Nature and of Nature''s God"? Challenging, upsetting, and controversial, this brilliant polemic may anger you, delight you, or force you to reexamine your opinions. One thing''s for sure: after reading America Declares Independence, you''ll never take the Declaration of Independence for granted again.