I've just started reading The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction by Akhil Reed Amar, a law professor at Yale. It looks like it's going to be a great read. Amar clearly does not shy away from controversy.
For instance, in his discussion of the First Amendment (the chapter I'm currently reading), Amar argues that the clause Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion was originally understood to mean that Congress could make no laws of any kind regarding religion, neither to establish it, nor to force the states to disestablish it. The regulation of religion was simply outside of Congress's power.
The book also promises to examine how and why this understanding changed, as well as examining the original meaning of other parts of the Bill of Rights. I'm looking forward to seeing what Amar has to say about this.