Mad at the U.S. Supreme Court? Unsure why justices have issued recent rulings? George Leef suggests in his latest Forbes column that a recent book can help you understand the recent batch of decisions from the nation’s highest court.

In late June of each year, the Supreme Court reveals many of its decisions in the cases argued that term. Inevitably, lots of Americans are upset over them. You may be one of those Americans, right now.

With all the furor over individual case facts and holdings, people are apt to miss a bigger picture – the judicial philosophies at work.

The clash of philosophies is the subject of an excellent recent book Overruled: The Long War for Control of the U.S. Supreme Court. Author Damon Root, a senior editor at Reason, explores the great divide between those justices who believe that, with only rare exceptions, they should defer to the presumed wisdom of the politicians when laws are challenged, and those justices who believe they should skeptically examine such laws with no deference given.

Justices in the former camp usually uphold laws and regulations because they think that the majority is entitled to rule. Those in the latter camp are not so sanguine about politics and will vote to overturn laws and regulations when they see them as being in conflict with individual rights. In the book, Root gives us an easily read and understood history of that battle going back to the years following the Civil War. He covers a lot of constitutional cases and the people involved in them. And while he doesn’t try to hide his libertarian sympathies, he is entirely fair to those he disagrees with.

If you’re interested in Root’s work, you also can watch a video of his April 2 Federalist Society speech in Raleigh on key themes from Overruled.