I don't care about "unpopular" Court rulings. I care about rulings that are blatent violations of the Constitution (such as the Affirmative Action College Admisions case ruling that Sandra Day O'Connor just farted).
"There are numerous good books which could help. One really good one is John Marshall, Interpreter of the Constitution by Jean Smith."
This quote facinates me. It betrays EXACTLY where you are comming from and it ain't pretty. You accuse me of being ignorant of the Constitution and suggest that I read.......NOT the Constitution, but.................. a book about an "interpreter" of the Constitution.
The Constitution is written in English, not 'Martian', Chinese, or any other real, fictional, dead, or other type of language. To study the Constitution, you need to be able to read and understand English, a copy of the Constitution and several dictionaries to cross-reference any word whos meaning needs elaboration. You DON'T need John Marshal's spin on it, or Jean Smith's spin on John Marshal's spin on it. I've collected the definition of "militia" from 7 different dictionaries, so far, and they all point to one thing. It ain't what Sarah Brady thinks. There's one example of a good start on the proper study of the Constitution. If you want a history of what judges have ruled, that's another topic.