Book Review: Bad Law

Elie Mystal, Bad law: ten popular laws that are ruining America. New York: The New Press, 2025.  ISBN: 9781620978580. 

Genre: U.S. politics

Subgenre: legislation, policy

Format: E-book galley; hardcover

Source: Edelweiss Plus; Hutchins Library, Berea College 

 

Elie Mystal is back with a new book about bad laws that keep causing harm but Americans consistently choose to keep them in the books, often for bigoted and privileged reasons. The book discusses 10 bad laws and one constitutional amendment that are, as he writes, "bigoted, ignorant, and unfair. . ." (6). The catch is these bad laws can be repealed, often quite easily, but Americans choose not to do so. And while most of these terrible bits of legislation were brought forth by Republicans, Democrats often went along aiding and abetting the Republicans. 

The book includes an introduction, 10 chapters, an epilogue, and a set of notes documenting the author's facts and research. Some of the topics the author discusses include voter registration, incarceration, LGBTQ rights, and religion. 

Mystal is a good writer, and he is very good at explaining ideas in a clear and accessible way. He can take legal concepts and break them down so ordinary folks can understand them. Add in a sense of humor, often dark humor, and some sarcasm and snark, and you have an entertaining and educational read. You do learn quite a bit about how laws work in the United States, mostly to uphold white privilege while oppressing anyone else not white, not a certain brand of Christian, and not male. 

My one disappointment is the book's conclusion, which, after railing about the evils of both political parties (rightfully so), goes to the old Democrat plea of "vote harder." We are way past that lame plea, and while I may not have an answer now, that conclusion does not inspire much faith, especially in the very Hard Times of 2025. 

Is the book worth reading? All in all yes, Should more people be reading it? Absolutely, but again, as I often say and write about books like this, the people need to be reading it never will. Those who will most likely read it are pretty much part of the choir. For me, at this point in time I am breaking my moratorium on reading and engaging with political/social issues/activist material. That is the moratorium I gave myself after the 2016 U.S. elections, which I did to keep my sanity. Breaking the moratorium to read this book was worth it. Despite an issue here or there, this is a book I will talk about and try to get more people to read it. 

Overall I really like the book, and I think it is a necessary book in these Hard Times. I did order a copy for our library, and I strongly recommend other libraries, public and academic, order it for their collections. 

4 out of 5 stars.

 

Additional reading notes: 

A reason, for me, for when some Americans whine "not all of us" or a variant of that line it is not an excuse: 

"In our society, we, the people, govern our laws, not the other way around. We choose them. We choose what's legal or illegal; we choose what's punished or rewarded. We choose to live this way" (1). 

It may not be all, but enough Americans constantly choose this and the rest are either too busy trying to live or just don't care anymore. 

 

The kind of laws the United States has and nurtures: 

"Our laws promoted bigotry and discrimination, the rapacious accumulation and hoarding of wealth, and vigilante justice, even at the cost our own children die in the cross fire. We have oft-repeated euphemisms to justify these choices: we call the hoarding of wealth 'fostering competition,' we call bigotry 'religious freedom,' and we call the mass murder of school children 'the Second Amendment'" (2). 

And these laws are by choice and very much self-inflicted wounds. In these Hard Times this may not be an easy book to read, but like a prophet the author preaches trying to get our society to see. But again, as an old saying goes, "no hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver." 

 

What the book does in brief: 

"This book will give you arguments to deploy against the forces of injustice, along with demands you can make of your elected representatives" (8). 

 

An example from the book where the author and I part ways: 

"We would all wake up tomorrow and simply decide to do better and voted for people with a more robust appreciation for fairness and equality" (8). 

We could, but I know, and I am willing to bet he knows it ain't happening any time soon if ever. I am more likely to win the Powerball lottery drawing, or better yet become a famous writer (this one if I put in the work I could do, which is more than most Americans are willing to do to fix their country). 

 

What the "American experiment" is really about: 

"The 'American Experiment' is not and has never been an experiment in democracy or republican self-government. It has always been an exercise in wealthy white male domination where everybody else, and the only question has been how long those whites can get away with it before everybody else comes together to defeat them" (16). 

 

Oh no, Mystal would not say both parties are the same, that would be simplistic, no way: 

"I am of the opinion that there is an important, cognizable difference between the people who want to keep America white through civil law and deportation and the people who want to keep America white through criminal law and armed good squads hunting immigrants" (45). 

Just so we are clear. 

 

Book qualifies for the following 2025 Reading Challenge: