Originally published in 1814, this is a reprint of the Yale University Press 1950 edition with an introduction by Roy Franklin Nichols. 562 pp. Taylor wrote this important work in 1814 as a reply to John Adams's Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America. Unlike Adams, he rejects the concept of "a natural aristocracy" of "paper and patronage" and a federal government based on a system of debt and taxes. He considers the American government to be one of divided powers responsible to the sovereign people alone. Opposed to the extent of power awarded to the executive office, he calls for shorter terms for the president and all elected officers. Charles Beard said this work "deserves to rank among the two or three really historic contributions to political science which have been produced in the United States." JOHN TAYLOR 1753-1824] was known as "John Taylor of Caroline County, Virginia." He served in the Continental Army and later in the Virginia House of Delegates, then served three terms as a member of the United States Senate. He is considered to be one of the nation's greatest philosophers of agrarian liberalism. He was one of the nation's first proponents of states' rights. His works include New Views of the Constitution of the United States (1823), Construction Construed, and Constitutions Vindicated (1820) and A Defence of the Measures of the Administration of Thomas Jefferson. By Curtius (1804), an argument in favor of the achievements of the first Jefferson administration.

Reprint of the rare 1843 edition. Tucker proposes a vigorous defense of states-rights principles in the manner of John Taylor of Caroline. A notably sophisticated argument, it balances detailed analysis of the U.S. Constitution with criticism of Joseph Story, Daniel Webster and other proponents of a powerful Federal government. Henry St. George Tucker 1780-1848] served as U.S. Congressman representing Virginia's 3rd District in the United States House of Representatives from 1815 to 1819. He studied under his father, St. George Tucker (editor of the American edition of Blackstone's Commentaries), at the College of William & Mary, and after he received his law degree, taught there himself. He was later was captain of Cavalry in the War of 1812, President of Virginia's Supreme Court of Appeals, (1831-1841) and, later in life, a prominent Professor of Law at the University of Virginia. He founded the Honor System there. Works that grew out of the classroom include Commentaries on the Laws of Virginia (1836-1837) and the present work. Tucker County, West Virginia, is named in his honor.

Peter Liddel offers a fresh approach to the old problem of the nature of individual liberty in ancient Athens. He draws extensively on oratorical and epigraphical evidence from the late fourth century BC to analyse the ways in which ideas about liberty were reconciled with ideas about obligation, and examines how this reconciliation was negotiated, performed, and presented in the Athenian law-courts, assembly, and through the inscriptional mode of publication. Using modern political theory as a springboard, Liddel argues that the ancient Athenians held liberty to consist of the substantial obligations (political, financial, and military) of citizenship.

David Saari provides an extended essay on the nature of freedom in contemporary America, its historical roots, and its present-day manifestations. Drawing on the fields of history, law, politics, business, and philosophy, this wide-ranging study examines three facets of freedom--national freedom, freedom from the state, and freedom within the state--as they have developed in American law, politics, and society. Each of these facets is carefully defined and then applied to such contemporary issues as authority, property, equality, justice, and privacy.

The development of an autonomous English public law has been accompanied by persistent problems - a lack of systematic principles, dissatisfaction with judicial procedures, and uncertainty about the judicial role. It has provoked an ongoing debate on the very desirability of the distinction between public and private law. In this debate, a historical and comparative perspective has been lacking. A Continental Distinction in the Common Law introduces such a perspective. It compares the recent emergence of a significant English distinction with the entrenchment of the traditional French distinction. It explains how persistent problems of English public law are related to fundamental differences between the English and French legal and political traditions, differences in their conception of the state administration, their approach to law, their separation of powers, and their judicial procedures in public-law cases. The author argues that a satisfactory distinction between public and private law depends on a particular legal and political context, a context which was evident in late nineteenth-century France and is absent in twentieth-century England. He concludes by identifying the far-reaching theoretical, institutional, and procedural changes required to accommodate English public law.

This title tracks the development of Justice Thurgood Marshall's rationale and reason regarding Indian law. Drawing from Marshall's career preceding his appointment to the Supreme Court, it is anticipated that Marshall's views In Indian law would be consistent with his previous role as a champion of the disenfranchised in America.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is not close to meeting its mandate to protect American workers, according to administrative law specialists McGarity and Shapiro. Thousands of men and women are still victims of workplace accidents and occupational disease. The goal of this book is to analyze why OSHA has failed and to suggest what can be done to set it back on track. The book, divided into six parts, evaluates the current status of the protection of workers and provides a history of OSHA regulation. The authors suggest four methods to reduce workplace health and safety risks: (1) better management of OSHA; (2) reduced oversight by the courts and the executive branch; (3) a change in OSHA's legislative mandate; and (4) empowering workers to protect themselves.

This important work will be of interest to scholars and professionals in occupational health, labor economics, labor law, and human resource management.

This book, through an analysis of 49,355 high value public procurement contracts awarded between 2004 and 2011, provides systematic evidence on favoritism in public procurement in Turkey. Public procurement is one of the main areas where the government and the private sector interact extensively and is thus open to favoritism and corruption. In Turkey, the new Public Procurement Law, which was drafted with the pull of the EU-IMF-WB nexus, has been amended more than 150 times by the AKP government. In addition to examining favoritism, this book also demonstrates how the legal amendments have increased the use of less competitive procurement methods and discretion in awarding contracts. The results reveal that the AKP majority government has used public procurement as an influential tool both to increase its electoral success, build its own elites and finance politics. The use of public procurement for rent creation and distribution is found to be particularly extensive in the construction and the services sector through the TOKI projects and the Municipal procurements.

This yearbook is a compilation of thematically arranged essays that critically analyseemerging developments, issues, and perspectives across different branches of law. Itconsists of research from scholars around the world with the view that comparativestudy would initiate dialogue on law and legal cultures across jurisdictions. The themesvary from jurisprudence of comparative law and its methodologies to intrinsic detailsof specific laws like memory laws. The sites of the enquiries in different chapters aredifferent legal systems, recent judgements, and aspects of human rights in a comparativeperspective. It comprises seven parts wherein the first part focuses on general themesof comparative law, the second part discusses private law through a comparative lens,and the third, fourth and fifth parts examine aspects of public law with special focuson constitutional law, human rights and economic laws. The sixth part engages withcriminal law and the last part of the book covers recent developments in the field ofcomparative law. This book intends to trigger a discussion on issues of comparativelaw from the vantage point of Global South, not only focusing on the Global North.It examines legal systems of countries from far-east and sub-continent and presentsinsights on their working. It encourages readers to gain a nuanced understanding ofthe working of law, legal systems and legal cultures, adding to existing deliberationson the constituents of an ideal system of law.

The subjects of Privacy and Data Protection are more relevant than ever with the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) becoming enforceable in May 2018. This volume brings together papers that offer conceptual analyses, highlight issues, propose solutions, and discuss practices regarding privacy and data protection. It is one of the results of the tenth annual International Conference on Computers, Privacy and Data Protection, CPDP 2017, held in Brussels in January 2017. The book explores Directive 95/46/EU and the GDPR moving from a market framing to a 'treaty-base games frame', the GDPR requirements regarding machine learning, the need for transparency in automated decision-making systems to warrant against wrong decisions and protect privacy, the riskrevolution in EU data protection law, data security challenges of Industry 4.0, (new) types of data introduced in the GDPR, privacy design implications of conversational agents, and reasonable expectations of data protection in Intelligent Orthoses. This interdisciplinary book was written while the implications of the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 were beginning to become clear. It discusses open issues, and daring and prospective approaches. It will serve as an insightful resource for readers with an interest in computers, privacy and data protection.

Calabresi complains that we are "choking on statutes" and proposes a restoration of the courts and their common law function. From a series of lectures given by Calabresi as part of The Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures delivered at Harvard Law School in March 1977.

Will treating the conduct of local governments the same as the conduct of private enterprises pose serious threats to government, industry, or the antitrust laws? Mark Lee argues that the nation will be better off as a result because efficient forms of economic organization, previouly prohibited by the judiciary, will be permitted to flower and antitrust's policy war with itself will be put to an end. Lee reviews the powerful implications of the Supreme Court rulings in City of Lafayette v. Louisiana Power and Light and Community Communications Co. v. City of Boulder and offers a comprehensive, up-to-date, and detailed analysis of cases involving allegations that a local government commited an antitrust offense. He introduces a unique system for classifying different practices, one based on microeconomic functions, that will permit practitioners to classify and analyze any practice that concerns them.

Legal uncertainty is particularly high in constitutional law, where the Supreme Court may overrule earlier decisions as not conforming to the Constitution. This critical study of constitutional decision-making in the Supreme Court emphasizes the failures of the justices to consider constitutional structure and the original meaning of language in context. Conant criticizes the Supreme Court's opinions supporting racial segregation and the perpetuation of a caste system until the final overruling in "Brown v. Board of Education"; the Court's antitrust exemption of professional baseball; and the recent finding that physical desecration of the flag is protected under freedom of speech.

This study challenges the view of the liberal scholars who argue that the Supreme Court must redefine the Constitution to keep up with the changing times, because this view gives approval for judicial usurpation of the amending power. It also rejects the view of conservative scholars, who contend that the Supreme Court must search for the intent of the framers of the Constitution, on the grounds that subjective intent is impossible to research. There was no verbatim reporter at the 1787 convention, and no such notes were available to the ratifying conventions in the states that rendered the proposed constitution into law in 1789. Following the methodology of Justice Holmes, Conant focuses this work on constitutional purposes and the meaning of language within its total social context at the time of its adoption.

Last and best edition of the first English law dictionary. Corrected and greatly enlarged, English and Law French in parallel columns. First published in 1527, this pioneering dictionary was originally written in Law French with the Latin title Expositiones Terminorum Legum Anglorumae. Quite popular with students and lawyers due to its clarity and concision, it went through at least twenty-nine editions, the last appearing in 1721(with reissues in 1742 and 1819). The 1721 edition was translated by his son, William Rastell, who is often listed as its author. "Rastell's Termes de la Ley is a book which, like St. Germain's Doctor and Student, reflects the common law at the close of the year-book period with much fidelity." --Thomas Atkins Street, The Foundation of Legal Liability III:79 John Rastell d.1536], an Oxford-educated printer and lawyer, was a Member of Parliament when the Protestant reformation was legalized. Around 1527, the time Les Termes de la Ley was first published, Rastell took part in the religious controversies of the time, defending the Roman doctrine of purgatory in his notable work, A New Boke of Purgatory. William Rastell 1508?-1565] was the eldest son of John Rastell. A printer, lawyer, judge and author, he published his great collection of statutes from the Magna Carta to the present in 1557. It was updated periodically, the final edition appearing in 1625. Rastell also compiled A Table Collected of the Yeres of our Lorde God and of the Yeres of the Kynges of Englande (1561). He edited many important works including Littleton's Tenures (1534) and Sir Anthony Fitzherbert's Natura Brevium.

This book seeks to understand how and why we should hold leaders responsible for the collective mass atrocities that are committed in times of conflict. It attempts to untangle the debates on modes of liability in international criminal law (ICL) that have become truly complex over the last twenty years, and to provide a way to identify the most appropriate model for leadership liability. A unique comparative theory of ICL is offered, which clarifies the way in which ICL develops as a patchwork of different domestic criminal law notions. This theory forms the basis for the comparison of some influential domestic criminal law systems, with a view to understanding the policy and cultural reasons for their differences. There is a particular focus on the background of the German law which has influenced the International Criminal Court so much recently. This helps to understand, and seek a solution to, the current impasses in the debates on which model of liability should be applied. An entire chapter of the book is devoted to considering why leaders should be held responsible for crimes committed by their subordinates, from legal, moral and pragmatic perspectives. The moral responsibility of leaders is translated into criminal liability, and the different domestic models of liability are translated to the international context, in such a way as to appeal to advanced students of ICL, academics, and practitioners who want to understand the complexities of leadership liability in international criminal law today and identify the best way to approach it. Cassandra Steer is Executive Director of Women in International Security Canada, and Junior Wainwright Fellow at McGill University, Canada. She holds a Ph.D. in Law from the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

The Judicial System: A Reference Handbook provides an authoritative and accessible one-stop resource for understanding the U.S. judicial system and its place in the fabric of American government and society. The American judicial system plays a central role in setting and enforcing the legal rules under which the people of the United States live. U.S. courts and laws, though, are complex and often criticized for bias and other alleged shortcomings, The U.S. Supreme Court has emerged as a particular focal point of political partisanship and controversy, both in terms of the legal decisions it hands down and the makeup of its membership. Like other books in the Contemporary World Issues series, this volume comprises seven chapters. Chapter 1 presents the origins, development, and current characteristics of the American judicial system. Chapter 2 discusses problems and controversies orbiting around the U.S. justice system today. Chapter 3 features a wide-ranging collection of essays that examine and illuminate various aspects of the judicial system. Chapter 4 profiles influential organizations and people related to the justice system, and Chapter 5 offers relevant data and documents about U.S. courts. Chapter 6 is composed of an annotated list of important resources, while Chapter 7 offers a useful chronology of events. Explains the responsibilities and authority of the United States' many different types of courts and how they fit together Explores major controversies surrounding the U.S. judicial system, including politicization of the courts and bias in the criminal justice system Provides wide-ranging perspectives on the judicial system from reformers, court employees, and scholars Provides a comprehensive annotated list of resources for further reading and research

Just as the polls opened on November 5, 1872, Susan B. Anthony arrived and filled out her "ticket" for the various candidates. But before it could be placed in the ballot box, a poll watcher objected, claiming her action violated the laws of New York and the state constitution. Anthony vehemently protested that as a citizen of the United States and the state of New York she was entitled to vote under the Fourteenth Amendment. The poll watchers gave in and allowed Anthony to deposit her ballots. Anthony was arrested, charged with a federal crime, and tried in court. Primarily represented within document collections and broader accounts of the fight for woman suffrage, Anthony's controversial trial-as a landmark narrative in the annals of American law-remains a relatively neglected subject. N. E. H. Hull provides the first book-length engagement with the legal dimensions of that narrative and in the process illuminates the laws, politics, and personalities at the heart of the trial and its outcome. Hull summarises the woman suffrage movement in the post-Civil War era, reveals its betrayal by former allies in the abolitionist movement, and describes its fall into disarray. She then chronicles Anthony's vote, arrest, and preliminary hearings, as well as the legal and public relations manoeuvring in the run-up to the trial. She captures the drama created by Anthony, her attorneys, the politically ambitious prosecutor, and presiding judge-and Supreme Court justice-Ward Hunt, who argued emphatically against Anthony's interpretation of the Reconstruction Amendments as the source of her voting rights. She then tracks further relevant developments in the trial's aftermath-including Minor v. Happersett, another key case for the voting rights of women-and follows the major players through the eventual passage of the Nineteenth (or "Susan B. Anthony") Amendment. Hull's concise and readable guide reveals a story of courage and despair, of sisterhood and rivalry, of high purpose and low politics. It also underscores for all of us how Anthony's act of civil disobedience remains essential to our understanding of both constitutional and women's history-and why it all matters. This book is part of the Landmark Law Cases and American Society series.

This book assesses the environmental jurisdiction of coastal states over the seabed within and beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines, thus mapping out coastal states' competencies to regulate activities impacting the marine environment of the sea floor. In addition, it offers revealing insights into the domestic legal and policy framework of a particular State in this regard. As Brazil intends to exploit mineral resources farther away offshore, technologically backed by the recognised expertise of its state-owned oil company, Petrobras, questions arise as to the adequacy of the country's domestic legal framework to sustainably manage the immenseness of the "Brazilian Blue Amazon". This book critically evaluates the compatibility of Brazil's national policies and legislation with the Law of the Sea, as well as the country's legal and institutional preparedness to face the challenges of managing approximately 4,5 million km(2) of maritime spaces under national jurisdiction.

This study is an empirical analysis of how the fluctuating legal environment in the courts surrounding obscenity litigation over a thirty year period is an appropriate vehicle with which to demonstrate the dynamics of widespread group involvement in the judicial process. Joseph F. Kobylka traces how the development of the obscenity law from the 1957 Roth v. United States decision, which established the proscription of obscenity through its libertarian interpretation by the Warren court and its reaffirmation by the 1973 Miller v. California decision, necessitated changes in both the behaviors and strategies of libertarian and conservative groups in the active pursuit of their particular goals.

After a review of the shifts in the Supreme Court's doctrines concerning obscenity, Kobylka identifies the various political interest groups, and examines their motives, goals, and the factors, both internal and external, that determined their responses to Miller. He concludes with a summary of findings confirming that the study's empirical approach yields a comprehensive understanding of the fluidity of group politics. Specific group involvement is documented in the appendices, and bibliographies furnish lists of books, articles, and a table of cases. "The Politics of Obscenity" will be a useful, authoritative volume for advanced courses in the judicial process and group politics, and will also be invaluable to academic libraries, political scientists, and other scholars.

This book examines the simultaneous protection of fundamental rights by various norms and jurisdictional organs, focussing on the multilevel protection of the principle of legality in Criminal Law.Written by accredited specialists in criminal law, constitutional law, international public law, and the philosophy of law, the majority of them ex-Counsels of the Spanish Constitutional Court, it addresses various manifestations of the principle of legality: the requirement of precision, the judicial subjection to law and the prohibition of bis in idem. It does so not only from a theoretical perspective, but also through a comparative study of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union and state constitutional courts. This practical approach characterizes the book, which culminates in a detailed analysis of the relevant ECtHR Judgement Del Rio Prada v. Spain on the retroactivity of unfavourable jurisprudence."Multilevel protection of the principle of legality in Criminal Law" is a useful instrument of reflection for scholars of both the principle of criminal legality and the problems that arise from the concurrency of protective jurisdictions of human rights.

This 1996 volume of essays is about something which (for many) does not exist and yet which remains central to our understanding of English politics, history and national identity - the constitution. As European integration and demands for constitutional reform have once again moved the constitution to the centre of contemporary politics, an impressive team of contributors re-examines aspects of the debates over the meaning of the constitution and 'public opinion' in the long nineteenth century, from a sedition trial in the 1790s to the enfranchisement of certain women in 1918. With essays engaging with the histories of law, medicine and even with history as a discipline, the book takes stock of the state of the cultural history of English politics, consolidating upon much of the most innovative work in recent years as well as suggesting ways of re-reading the traditional narratives of English political history.

This book originated as a series of lectures presented at Johns Hopkins in 1915. It proposes a method to supplement the established doctrine of constitutional law, which enforces legislative norms through negation and review, by a system of positive principles that would guide the making of statutes and give more definite meaning and content to the concept of due process. Highly regarded since its original publication in 1917 and the winner of Harvard Law School's Ames Prize in 1919, it went on to become a standard work. It was recommended, to cite two examples, in Roscoe Pound's Introduction to American Law (1919) and Arthur Vanderbilt's Studying Law (1945). A comment published at the end of Freund's career summarizes a general opinion: "The great quality which Ernst Freund brought to the study of administrative law was his capacity for analysis. He was the Austin of the jurisprudence of administrative law." -W.I.J., Law Quarterly Review 49 (1933): 588."We have seldom read an essay so philosophically and learnedly written and one which at the same time is extremely interesting as well as constructive. Mention is made of practically all our general classes of legislation during 'the last century, and in every instance we are treated with a learned historical review of the subject under consideration."-American Law Review 52 (1918) 476.Ernst Freund 1864-1932] was Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Law at the University of Chicago. He is widely considered to be responsible for the development of administrative law in the United States.