Indexes congressional and other government publications, books, pamphlets, reports, papers, and periodical materials that deal with aspects of the history of the Equal Rights Amendment.

This is one of the very first studies by Chinese and Western experts to examine the current picture of public administration in China. Mills and Nagel provide a general background into the nature of public administration in China, specific reforms in government agencies, personnel administration and compensation, and administrative law. Insiders and frequent visitors evaluate the state of public administration today for scholars, students, and practitioners in public administration and political science.

This unique appraisal opens with a general discussion of public administration in China and the teaching of administrative science. The second section defines basic concepts behind China's administration systems, current reforms, constraints on Chinese bureaucracy and coordination, and administrative law. The third section of the book describes efforts underway to promote a better quality of personnel, to appraise performance more fully, and to reevaluate methods of compensation. In conclusion, insiders to China provide current assessments of the situation in China currently in the field of public administration.

Previously titled Lawful Living, this second edition is revised, expanded, updated and now fully indexed.

It presents a compilation of the provisions tucked away in nearly 300 South African statutes, which lay down the law for compliance – whether in business, at home, or by Government. The provisions have been rewritten in plain language by a senior advocate with 35 years' legal experience. They are neatly arranged into areas of commerce, industry and everyday life and can be found quickly - and understood.

The book does not deal with compliance frameworks internal and specific to corporations, and professional or industry associations and bodies. However, it is an invaluable resource for professionals, businesses, law-enforcement agencies, and all citizens: in other words, those who want to stay compliant - or hold accountable the government, their municipality, their neighbour or their competitor.

""Playing it Safe, How the Supreme Court Sidesteps Hard Cases and Stunts the Development of Law" is a book that will not only entertain but also remind us of the fact that many of the Court's most interesting decisions come not in its published written opinions addressing the merits of a case, but in their decisions not to hear a case based on purely procedural rationales. Recommended."
-- "New York Law Journal"

"Kloppenberg has provided the first sustained attack on the long-standing judicial practice of avoidance in at least a generation...her argument deserves careful attention."
--Cass Sunstein," New Republic," 10/01

It is one of the unspoken truths of the American judicial system that courts go out of their way to avoid having to decide important and controversial issues. Even the Supreme Courtfrom which the entire nation seeks guidancefrequently engages in transparent tactics to avoid difficult, politically sensitive cases.

"[A] well-informed book."
-- "Choice"

The Court's reliance on avoidance has been inconsistent and at times politically motivated. For example, liberal New Deal Justices, responding to the activism of a conservative Court, promoted deference to Congress and the presidency to protect the Court from political pressure. Likewise, as the Warren Court recognized new constitutional rights, conservative judges and critics praised avoidance as a foundational rule of judicial restraint. And as conservative Justices have constituted the majority on the Court in recent years, many liberals and moderates have urged avoidance, for fear of disagreeable verdicts.

By sharing the stories of litigants who struggled unsuccessfully to raise before theSupreme Court constitutional matters of the utmost importance from the 1970s-1990s, Playing it Safe argues that judges who fail to exercise their power in hard cases in effect abdicate their constitutional responsibility when it is needed most, and in so doing betray their commitment to neutrality. Lisa Kloppenberg demonstrates how the Court often avoids socially sensitive cases, such as those involving racial and ethnic discrimination, gender inequalities, abortion restrictions, sexual orientation discrimination, and environmental abuses. In the process, the Court ducks its responsibility to check the more politically responsive branches of government when "majority rule" pushes the boundaries of constitutional law. The Court has not used these malleable doctrines evenhandedly: it has actively shielded states from liability and national oversight, and aggressively expanded standing requirements to limit the role of federal courts.

Abstruse legal phrases often inform our understanding of intricate cases. But those situations are also led, not outpaced, by basic equity principles of life itself. What statisticians call the law of large numbers and intelligence analysts in the world of science fiction know as the Bergofsky Principle is our structural faith in empirical knowledge. In this day, this process of experience and learning has moved into an international and interdisciplinary scale. That idea cannot be lost on us. Around the world, business and political leaders work together to realize common goals. But how does the rule of law impact these developments in strategy and technology, sustainable development, and access to justice? Armed with realism, Changing Face of the Law: A Global Perspective actively explores the legal traditions of the United States, India, and other commonwealth nations. A budding lawyer, author Riddhi Dasgupta provides an insider's look at the link between the rule of law and corporate ethics, the law's imagination, and our global dialogue. Lawful governance, or Gandhi's swaraj, is our linchpin. perspectives of law. Giving us examples of this approach in the areas of free thought, federalism and development, and the law's role as a teacher, Dasgupta pinpoints the 'active liberty of the world's citizens-their own governance-as the key issue. Every generation has its challenges, and ours lie in combating the emergent economic, health, corruption, and terrorism crises through the rule of law. Each sector in our society (from multinational corporations to social groups) is a vital piece of the puzzle. There is no doubt that the success or failure of this collaboration will measure our legacy.

Freedom of speech is a foundational principle of the American Constitutional system. This collection of over 100 primary documents from a variety of sources will help students understand exactly what is meant by "free speech," and how it has evolved since the founding of our country. Court cases, opinion pieces, and many other documents bring to life the tension between America's constitutional commitment to robust and unrestrained discourse and recurring efforts to suppress expression deemed dangerous, degrading or obscene. Explanatory introductions to each document aid users in understanding the various arguments put forth in debates over exactly how to define the Constitution to encourage readers to consider all sides when drawing their own conclusions. Relying heavily on Supreme Court precedents that have shaped First Amendment law, the volume also provides plenty of carefully selected source materials chosen to reflect the culture of the times, allowing the reader to better understand the climate giving rise to each controversy. The introductory and explanatory text help readers understand the nature of the conflicts, the issues being litigated, the social and cultural pressures that shaped each debate, and the manner in which the composition of the Supreme Court and the passions of the individual Justices affected the development of the law. This welcome resource will provide students with the opportunity to explore the philosophy of the First Amendment's Free Speech provisions and to understand how our historic commitment to freedom of expression has fared at various times in our history.

There have been few studies of the Law Lords, and no study of them by a political scientist for more than ten years. This book concentrates on the arguments the Law Lords use in justifying their decisions, and is concerned as much with the legal methodology as with the substance of their decisions. Very close attention is paid to the different approaches and styles of judicial argument, but the book is not restricted to this traditional analytic approach. One chapter applies the statistical techniques Americans call 'jurimetrics' and have successfully used on the US Supreme Court. The main theme is that the Law Lords enjoy and fully utilise far more discretion in their judgements than is normally admitted, and that much depends on exactly which judges happen to hear a case. the second part of the book shows the impact this extreme discretion has had in shaping both public law and areas of civil law.

Debates over the separation or accommodation of religion and government have divided Americans since the founding of our country and continue to echo in governmental chambers today, as people argue sharply and heatedly about the exact meaning and correct applications of First Amendment clauses on religious establishment and free exercise of religion. Students can trace the history and development of these arguments, as well as the reactions to them, through this unique collection of over 70 primary documents. Court cases and other documents bring to life the controversies surrounding the issues. Explanatory introductions to documents aid users in understanding the various arguments put forth, while illuminating the significance of each document.

Patrick and Long trace the origins and changes in the nature of the debates surrounding the issue of freedom of religion using carefully chosen court cases and other documents to reflect the fact that the Court's decision has not always ended public controversy about the relationships between church and state or religion and government. Indeed, especially in recent years, the Court's decisions in some cases have exacerbated old tensions and generated new issues. The focus throughout is on the connection between the U.S. Constitution and freedom of religion. The introductory and explanatory text help readers understand the nature of the conflicts, the issues being litigated, the social and cultural pressures that shaped each debate, and the manner in which the passions of individual government officials, justices, and our presidents affected the development of policies concerning freedom of religion.

'In this important contribution to the analysis and construction of European Union citizenship, Charlotte O'Brien provides her characteristic blend of rigorous legal scholarship and compelling social vision. She identifies challenging questions about the relationship between justice and vulnerability that should concern the shaping of law at all levels of governance.' Professor Niamh Nic Shuibhne, University of Edinburgh 'Piercing the veil of well-known proclamations of "equality" and "non-discrimination", in this intimate portrait of Union law O'Brien sounds a sobering wake up call. The Union, to the genuine surprise of some converted, is a powerful actor of injustice, failing the vulnerable Europeans at many a turn, blinded by its own proclaimed righteousness and goodness to be aware of the plight of those it lets down. The sooner we dispel the oxymoronic myth of a "market citizen" as a necessary tool of the uniquely benevolent EU internal market project, the sooner the process of healing the Union turning its back on the majority of Europeans can begin. This book is an important part of this beginning.' Professor Dimitry Kochenov, University of Groningen 'Doctrinal mastery. Intellectual rigour. Conceptual depth. Empirical enrichment. O'Brien's landmark text offers its readers all of these qualities. But she also writes with a clarity and honesty of purpose that is an inspiration to her readers. Particularly at a time when certain political actors seek to vilify "expertise", Unity in Adversity is a testament to the value of independent and critical academic research.' Professor Michael Dougan, University of Liverpool The EU is at a crossroads of constitution and conscience. Unity in Adversity argues that EU market citizenship is incompatible with a pursuit of social justice, because it contributes to the social exclusion of women and children, promotes a class-based conception of rights, and tolerates in-work poverty. The limitations of EU citizenship are clearest when EU nationals engage with national welfare systems, but this experience has been neglected in EU legal research. Unity in Adversity draws upon the ground-breaking EU Rights Project, working first hand with EU nationals in the UK, providing advice and advocacy, and giving ethnographic insight into the process of navigating EU and UK welfare law. Its study of EU law in action is a radical new approach, and the case studies illustrate the political, legal and administrative obstacles to justice faced by EU nationals. Taken together, the strands demonstrate that 'equal treatment' for EU nationals is an illusion. The UK's welfare reforms directed at EU nationals are analysed as a programme of declaratory discrimination, and in light of the subsequent referendum, should be treated as a cautionary tale - both to the EU, to take social justice seriously, and to other Member States, to steer away from xenophobic law-making. Shortlisted for the 2018 BBC Thinking Allowed Award for Ethnography. Winner of the 2019 Hart-SLSA Book Prize.

The seven-volume edition contains about 500 constitutional texts, constitutional amendments, failed constitutions and draft constitutions from the United States, all in their original languages and alphabetically ordered. The texts, including some rare original versions, have been edited and annotated on the basis of the printed official state documents and conventions, consulting the original manuscripts. The constitutional documents from South Carolina to Texas are published in volume VI and the constitutional documents from Vermont to Wisconsin are published in volume VII.

Over the last decade the regulatory evaluation of environmental and public health risks has been one of the most legally controversial areas of contemporary government activity. Much of that debate has been understood as a conflict between those promoting 'scientific' approaches to risk evaluation and those promoting 'democratic' approaches. This characterization of disputes has ignored the central roles of public administration and law in technological risk evaluation. This is problematic because, as shown in this book, legal disputes over risk evaluation are disputes over administrative constitutionalism in that they are disputes over what role law should play in constituting and limiting the power of administrative risk regulators. This is shown by five case studies taken from five different legal cultures: an analysis of the bifurcated role of the Southwood Working Party in the UK BSE crisis; the development of doctrines in relation to judicial review of risk evaluation in the US in the 1970s; the interpretation of the precautionary principle by environmental courts and generalist tribunals carrying out merits review in Australia; the interpretation of the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement as part of the WTO dispute settlement process; and the interpretation of the precautionary principle in the EU context. A strong argument is thus made for re-orienting the focus of scholarship in this area.

Sovereignty in Transition brings together a group of leading scholars from law and cognate disciplines to assess contemporary developments in the framework of ideas and the variety of institutional forms associated with the concept of sovereignty. Sovereignty has been described as the main organizing concept of the international society of states - one which is traditionally central to the discipline and practice of both constitutional law and of international law. The volume asks to what extent, and with what implications, this centrality is challenged by contemporary developments that shift authority away from the state to new sub-state, supra-state and non-state forms. A particular focus of attention is the European Union, and the relationship between the sovereignty traditions of various member states on the one hand and the new claims to authority made on behalf of the European Union itself on the other are examined. The collection also includes contributions from international law, legal philosophy, legal history, political theory, political science, international relations and theology that seek to examine the state of the sovereignty debate in these disciplines in ways that throw light on the focal constitutional debate in the European Union.

This book, which takes account of legal developments until April 2012, describes in detail the EU law affecting the transparency of the institutions as well as the actual practice of the European Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. The relevant practice of other institutions and bodies is also considered. Among the topics covered are:; the scope and extent of public access to documents under Regulation 1049/2001; the impact on public access of Regulation 1367/2006 (the 'Aarhus Regulation'); the procedure for applying for public access; rules on classified information; data protection and public access; the openness of decision-making, the relationship of Regulation 1049/2001 and other rules on access to documents; the law pertaining to the Official Journal;; other aspects of transparency of EU decision-making, such as languages, quality of drafting and the involvement of lobbyists; remedies in Court and before the Ombudsman.

The contributions brought together in this book derive from joint seminars, held by scholars between colleagues from the University of Oxford and the University of Paris II. Their starting point is the original divergence between the two jurisdictions, with the initial rejection of the public-private divide in English Law, but on the other hand its total acceptance as natural in French Law. Then, they go on to demonstrate that the two systems have converged, the British one towards a certain degree of acceptance of the division, the French one towards a growing questioning of it. However this is not the only part of the story, since both visions are now commonly coloured and affected by European Law and by globalisation, which introduces new tensions into our legal understanding of what is "public" and what is "private".

Is man truly the measure of all things? If so, then perhaps that very premise accounts for our nation's constitutional ills.

In a wide-ranging study based on legal history, political theory, and philosophical concepts going all the way back to Plato, Robert Clinton seeks to challenge current faith in an activist judiciary. Claiming that a human-centered Constitution leads to government by reductive moral theory and illegitimate judicial review, he advocates a return to traditional jurisprudence and a God-centered Constitution grounded in English common law and its precedents.

Building upon his widely-discussed work Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review, in which he urged the need for greater judicial accountability, Clinton reviews the transformation of legal traditions through the "Marbury Myth" and advocates a jurisprudence that would constrain capricious judicial interpretation by re-establishing traditional methods of legal analysis and rules of precedent. He seeks to ground constitutional theory in common law reasoning, and to ground common law reasoning in a naturalistic jurisprudence-conceived along Thomistic lines--that presupposes a transcendent source of legal order in the world.

Clinton argues that his proposed reorientation is superior to today's most influential approaches to constitutional interpretation, particularly academic moralism and subjective intentionalism. His account of the doctrine of original intention particularly helps to clarify an issue that has until now received much political attention but little scholarly analysis that is not already associated with these prevailing approaches.

"God and Man in the Law" joins a literature that stands at the intersection of political science and the study of law and will enlighten scholars who study constitutional matters in both fields. By focusing on the relation between judicial review and constitutional interpretation, it challenges judges to reclaim the traditions of the past for the sake of democracy's future.

This book provides a new conceptual model for considering constitutional rights from a comparative perspective. A prestigious club bars women from standing for executive positions. A homeowner refuses to rent their house to a person on grounds of their race. Each of these real-life cases involves the exercise of private power, which deprives individuals of their rights. Can these individuals invoke the Constitution in response? Horizontal Rights: An Institutional Approach brings a fresh perspective to these age-old, yet fraught issues. This book argues that constitutional scholarship and doctrine, across jurisdictions, has proceeded from an inarticulate premise called ‘default verticality.’ This is based on a set of underlying philosophical assumptions, which presumes that constitutional rights are presumptively applicable against the State, and need special justification to be applied against private parties. Departing from default verticality and its assumptions, this book argues that constitutional rights should apply horizontally between private parties where the existence of an economic, social, or cultural institution creates a difference in power between the parties, and allows one to violate the rights of the other. The institutional approach aims to be both theoretically convincing, as well as a providing a workable model for constitutional adjudication. It applies both to classic issues such as restrictive covenants, as well as cutting-edge contemporary legal problems around the regulation of platform work and the distribution of property upon divorce. This promises to be an exciting new contribution to the global conversation around constitutional rights and private power.

Although human rights belong to all persons on the basis of their humanity, this book demonstrates that in the practice of international human rights law, the freedom to be non-religious or atheist does not receive the same protection as the freedom to be religious. Despite the claimed universality of freedom of religion and belief contained in article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the key assertion made is that there is a hierarchy of religion and belief, with followers of major established religions enjoying high protection and low regulation at the top, and atheists and non-believers enduring high persecution and weaker protection at the bottom. The existence of this hierarchy is proven and critiqued through three case study chapters that respectively explore the extent to which non-religious and atheist rights-holders enjoy freedom from proselytism, freedom from hate and freedom from the religions of their parents.