Your cart is empty
The Poverty of Privacy Rights makes a simple, controversial argument: Poor mothers in America have been deprived of the right to privacy. The U.S. Constitution is supposed to bestow rights equally. Yet the poor are subject to invasions of privacy that can be perceived as gross demonstrations of governmental power without limits. Courts have routinely upheld the constitutionality of privacy invasions on the poor, and legal scholars typically understand marginalized populations to have "weak versions" of the privacy rights everyone else enjoys. Khiara M. Bridges investigates poor mothers' experiences with the state-both when they receive public assistance and when they do not. Presenting a holistic view of just how the state intervenes in all facets of poor mothers' privacy, Bridges shows how the Constitution has not been interpreted to bestow these women with family, informational, and reproductive privacy rights. Bridges seeks to turn popular thinking on its head: Poor mothers' lack of privacy is not a function of their reliance on government assistance-rather it is a function of their not bearing any privacy rights in the first place. Until we disrupt the cultural narratives that equate poverty with immorality, poor mothers will continue to be denied this right.
This book explores the legitimacy of political asylum applications in the US and UK through an examination of the varieties of evidence, narratives, and documentation with which they are assessed. Credibility is the central issue in determining the legitimacy of political asylum seekers, but the line between truth and lies is often elusive, partly because desperate people often have to use deception to escape persecution. The vetting process has become infused with a climate of suspicion that not only assesses the credibility of an applicant's story and differentiates between the economic migrant and the person fleeing persecution, but also attempts to determine whether an applicant represents a future threat to the receiving country. This innovative text approaches the problem of deception from several angles, including increased demand for evidence, uses of new technologies to examine applicants' narratives, assessments of forged documents, attempts to differentiate between victims and persecutors, and ways that cultural misunderstandings can compromise the process. Essential reading for researchers and students of Political Science, International Studies, Refugee and Migration Studies, Human Rights, Anthropology, Sociology, Law, Public Policy, and Narrative Studies.
Citizenship is no longer an exclusive relationship. Many people today are citizens of multiple countries, whether by birth, naturalization, or even through monetary means, with schemes fast-tracking citizenship applications from foreigners making large investments in the state. Moral problems surround each of those ways of acquiring a second citizenship, while retaining one's original citizenship. Multiple citizenship can also have morally problematic consequences for the coherence of collective decisions, for the constitution of the demos, and for global inequality. The phenomenon of multiple citizenship and its ramifications remains understudied, despite its magnitude and political importance. In this innovative book, Ana Tanasoca explores these issues and shows how they could be avoided by unbundling the rights that currently come with citizenship and allocating them separately. It will appeal to scholars and students of normative political theory, citizenship, global justice, and migration in political science, law, and sociology.
Are Supreme Court justices swayed by the political environment that surrounds them? The intuitive response of most is "yes," and most point to trends in electoral politics as well as the nature of the relationship between the three branches of government. It is not that simple, however. As the eminent law and politics scholars Neal Devins and Larry Baum show in The Company They Keep, justices today are reacting to far more subtle social drivers than pressure from other branches of government or mass public opinion. In particular, by making use of social psychology, they examine why Justices are apt to follow the lead of the elite social networks that they are a part of. That is, the justices take cues primarily from the people who are closest to them and whose approval they care most about: political, social, and professional elites. The result is a court in which the justices' ideological stances reflect the dominant views in the appointing president's party. Devins and Baum argue that today's partisanship on the Court is also tied to the emergence of the conservative legal network-a social network that reinforces the conservative leanings of Republican appointees. For earlier Courts, elite social networks were not divided by political party or ideology, but for today's Court, elite social networks are largely bifurcated by partisan and ideological loyalties, and the Justices reflect that bifurcation. A fascinating examination the factors that impact decision-making, The Company They Keep will reshape our understanding of the contemporary Supreme Court.
In this controversial and provocative book, Mary Anne Franks examines the thin line between constitutional fidelity and constitutional fundamentalism. The Cult of the Constitution reveals how deep fundamentalist strains in both conservative and liberal American thought keeps the Constitution in the service of white male supremacy. Constitutional fundamentalists read the Constitution selectively and self-servingly. Fundamentalist interpretations of the Constitution elevate certain constitutional rights above all others, benefit the most powerful members of society, and undermine the integrity of the document as a whole. The conservative fetish for the Second Amendment (enforced by groups such as the NRA) provides an obvious example of constitutional fundamentalism; the liberal fetish for the First Amendment (enforced by groups such as the ACLU) is less obvious but no less influential. Economic and civil libertarianism have increasingly merged to produce a deregulatory, "free-market" approach to constitutional rights that achieves fullest expression in the idealization of the Internet. The worship of guns, speech, and the Internet in the name of the Constitution has blurred the boundaries between conduct and speech and between veneration and violence. But the Constitution itself contains the antidote to fundamentalism. The Cult of the Constitution lays bare the dark, antidemocratic consequences of constitutional fundamentalism and urges readers to take the Constitution seriously, not selectively.
In 2007 the International Association of Constitutional Law established an Interest Group on 'The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges' to conduct a survey of the use of foreign precedents by Supreme and Constitutional Courts in deciding constitutional cases. Its purpose was to determine - through empirical analysis employing both quantitative and qualitative indicators - the extent to which foreign case law is cited. The survey aimed to test the reliability of studies describing and reporting instances of transjudicial communication between Courts. The research also provides useful insights into the extent to which a progressive constitutional convergence may be taking place between common law and civil law traditions. The present work includes studies by scholars from African, American, Asian, European, Latin American and Oceania countries, representing jurisdictions belonging to both common law and civil law traditions, and countries employing both centralised and decentralised systems of judicial review. The results, published here for the first time, give us the best evidence yet of the existence and limits of a transnational constitutional communication between courts. The collected data for each jurisdiction makes for engaging reading. It reveals details of the extent of visible (and sometimes implied) comparative activity that each of the courts displays in its jurisprudence ... we now have a clearer picture of how some of the most prominent constitutional courts deal (or desist from dealing) with comparable judgments in other countries. Francois Venter, International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 12, no 1, January 2014 The volume ... represents a refreshing approach to complex questions raised in debates about constitutional borrowing, transjudicial communication, or the migration of constitutional ideas ... The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges will be essential reading for scholars seeking to refresh the debates about using foreign law. Helene Tyrrell, Public Law, April 2014
How has the modern conservative movement thrived in spite of the lack of harmony among its constituent members? What, and who, holds together its large corporate interests, small-government libertarians, social and racial traditionalists, and evangelical Christians? Raised Right pursues these questions through a cultural study of three iconic conservative figures: National Review editor William F. Buckley, Jr., President Ronald Reagan, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Examining their papers, writings, and rhetoric, Jeffrey R. Dudas identifies what he terms a "paternal rights discourse"-the arguments about fatherhood and rights that permeate their personal lives and political visions. For each, paternal discipline was crucial to producing autonomous citizens worthy and capable of self-governance. This paternalist logic is the cohesive agent for an entire conservative movement, uniting its celebration of "founding fathers," past and present, constitutional and biological. Yet this discourse produces a paradox: When do authoritative fathers transfer their rights to these well-raised citizens? This duality propels conservative politics forward with unruly results. The mythology of these American fathers gives conservatives something, and someone, to believe in-and therein lies its timeless appeal.
La Constitucion de los Estados Unidos fue redactada en la Convencion Constitucional en Filadelfia en 1787, firmada el 17 de septiembre de 1787 y ratificada por el numero requerido de estados (nueve) el 21 de junio de 1788. Sustituyo los Articulos de la Confederacion, los estatutos originales de los Estados Unidos que estaban vigentes desde 1781.
A central concern about the robustness of democratic rule in new democracies is the concentration of power in the executive branch and the potential this creates for abuse. This concern is felt particularly with regard to the concentration of legislative power. Checking Presidential Power explains the levels of reliance on executive decrees in a comparative perspective. Building on the idea of institutional commitment, which affects the enforcement of decision-making rules, Palanza describes the degree to which countries rely on executive decree authority as more reliance may lead to unbalanced presidential systems and will ultimately affect democratic quality. Breaking new ground by both theorizing and empirically analyzing decree authority from a comparative perspective, this book examines policy making in separation of powers systems. It explains the choice between decrees and statutes, and why legislators are sometimes profoundly engaged in the legislative process and yet other times entirely withdrawn from it.
The courts use the proportionality test to assess the Convention-compatibility of the full range of government action, from administrative decisions to primary legislation. In applying the test, the courts are often conscious of the need to pay some deference to the expertise and competence of other branches of government. This rigorous analysis of the relationship between proportionality and deference under the Human Rights Act sets out a model of proportionality, drawn from existing case law, which integrates deference within the multi-stage proportionality test. The model is 'institutionally sensitive' and can be applied to proportionality-based judicial review of all forms of government activity. The model is shown in operation in three fields that span the full range of government activity: immigration (administrative action), criminal justice (legislation) and housing (multi-level decisions).
The first wave of democratization in the United States - the removal of property and taxpaying qualifications for the right to vote - was accompanied by the disenfranchisement of African American men, with the political actors most supportive of the former also the most insistent upon the latter. The United States is not unique in this respect: other canonical cases of democratization also saw simultaneous expansions and restrictions of political rights, yet this pattern has never been fully detailed or explained. Through case studies of the USA, the UK, and France, Disenfranchising Democracy offers the first cross-national account of the relationship between democratization and disenfranchisement. It develops a political institutional perspective to explain their co-occurrence, focusing on the politics of coalition-building and the visions of political community coalitions advance in support of their goals. Bateman sheds new light on democratization, connecting it to the construction of citizenship and cultural identities.
Service and Procedures in Bureaucracy was first published in 1956. Minnesota Archive Editions uses digital technology to make long-unavailable books once again accessible, and are published unaltered from the original University of Minnesota Press editions.Large, complex systems of organization, such as government bureaus, giant corporations, and massive trade unions, play a decisive role in the daily lives of millions of people and exert an important influence upon national and even international affairs. This gives major sociological significance to the bureaucratic organizations of such groups.The research reported here was undertaken to test two widespread beliefs about modern, largescale organizations, and the findings point to modifications in what has been regarded as the classic sociological concept of bureaucracy.Does the personnel in bureaucracies commonly substitute rule-following, preoccupation with procedure, for the intended service purpose of the organization? And are bureaucracies characterized by impersonality, that is, detachment of office from individual, so that relations are between offices rather than between individuals? These are the questions the authors sought to answer in their study of the Louisiana Division of Employment Security. They observed employees working at their jobs, conducted interviews, administered questionnaires, and studied the official documents and records of the organization.Here is a picture of bureaucracy in real life that will provide valuable insight to those actively concerned with administration and personnel problems, as well as to students in the social sciences.
La Constitucion de 1993 fue redactada por el Congreso Constituyente Democratico tras el autogolpe y la subsecuente crisis constitucional de 1992. Fue aprobada mediante el referendum de 1993, durante el gobierno de Alberto Fujimori, aunque los resultados han sido discutidos por algunos sectores, es actualmente la base del sistema juridico del pais.
Markets sometimes fail. But so do regulatory efforts to correct market failures. Sometimes regulations reach too far, condemning good activities as well as bad, and sometimes they don't reach far enough, allowing bad behavior to persist. In this highly instructive book, Thomas A. Lambert explains the pitfalls of both extremes while offering readers a manual of effective regulation, showing how the best regulation maximizes social welfare and minimizes social costs. Working like a physician, Lambert demonstrates how regulators should diagnose the underlying disease and identify its symptoms, potential remedies for it, and their side effects before selecting the regulation that offers the greatest net benefit. This book should be read by policymakers, students, and anyone else interested in understanding how the best regulations are crafted and why they work.
Nordic law is often referred to as something different from other legal systems. At the same time, it is a common belief that the Nordic countries share more or less the same legal tradition and are very similar in their approach to the law. Considering both of these points of view, the book tells a story of how Nordic law and Nordic legal thinking differ from other legal systems, and how there are many particularities in the law of each of the Nordic countries, making them different from each other. The idea of "Nordic" law also conceals national features. The basic premise of the book is that even if, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a Nordic common law, it still makes sense to speak of "Nordic" law, and that acquiring a more-than-basic knowledge of this law is interesting not only for comparative lawyers, but also helpful for those working with Nordic lawyers and dealing with questions involving law in the Nordic countries.
Theoretically, the right to privacy is an individual's right to space away from the public gaze to make life choices that are best for her or him, regardless of the beliefs of the majority. Yet the right to privacy in the United States has proven problematic for both political theorists and constitutional scholars, as it does not conform to theoretical conceptions of privacy or to existing theories of constitutional development. Mary McThomas provides a new model that helps us to think about both the right to privacy as well as constitutional development. She first divides privacy issues into two categories, and then illustrates how the two categories are treated differently. The first category, proprietary privacy, covers such issues as medical records and wiretapping. The second category, decisional privacy, involves making decisions about intimate matters such as the right to die, same-sex marriage, and abortion. McThomas tracks and assesses higher court cases in conversational privacy, representative of proprietary privacy, and court cases in marital privacy, representative of decisional privacy. She concludes that the most notable difference between the different types of privacy is that decisional privacy has evolved more slowly towards constitutionalization, and so is much more likely to be limited by community standards and social norms. This book brings the theoretical conceptions and the practice of privacy rights together, explaining what has happened in the area up until this point, and offering ways to predict how the courts will handle some of today's most contentious issues.
The Fifteenth Edition covers the 2014 midterm elections and includes discussions of the agenda of the new Congress, White House-Capitol Hill relations, party and committee leadership changes, judicial appointments, and partisan polarization. Offering a balance of great scholarship and currency, this best seller features lively case material along with relevant data, charts, exhibits, maps, and photos. New and updated topics in the Fifteenth Edition include: Coverage of changes in the campaign finance landscape Recent examples of legislative battles and policy debates Profiles of new leaders and members Discussion of changes in congressional rules and procedures Examination of rising party conflict in House and Senate Extensive updates on national security issues facing Congress
First published in September 1992, the book traces the nature and development of the fundamental legal relationships among slaves, masters, and third parties. It shows how the colonial and antebellum Southern judges and legislators accommodated slavery's social relationships into the common law, and how slave law evolved in different states over time in response to social political, economic, and intellectual developments. The book states that the law of slavery in the US South treated slaves both as people and property. It reconciles this apparent contradiction by demonstrating that slaves were defined in the law as items of human property without any legal rights. When the lawmakers recognized slaves as people, they burdened slaves with added legal duties and disabilities. This epitomized in legal terms slavery's oppressive social relationships. The book also illustrates how cases in which the lawmakers recognized slaves as people legitimized slavery's inhumanity. References in the law to the legal humanity of people held as slaves are shown to be rhetorical devices and cruel ironies that regulated the relative rights of the slaves' owners and other free people that were embodied in people held as slaves. Thus, it is argued that it never makes sense to think of slave legal rights. This was so even when the lawmakers regulated the individual masters' rights to treat their slaves as they wished. These regulations advanced policies that the lawmakers perceived to be in the public interest within the context of a slave society.
The public sector ombudsman has become one of the most important administrative justice institutions in many countries around the world. This international and interdisciplinary Research Handbook brings together leading scholars and practitioners to discuss the state-of-the-art research on this increasingly prominent institution. Traditionally, research on the ombudsman has been conducted from a purely prescriptive or (legal) descriptive perspective, mainly focusing on the ombudsman `in the books'. By contrast, this book illustrates how empirical research may contribute to a better understanding of the ombudsman `in action'. It uses new empirical studies and competing theoretical explanations to critically examine important aspects of the ombudsman's work. The Research Handbook is organized in to four parts: fundamentals of the ombudsman; the evolution of the ombudsman; evaluation of the ombudsman; and the ombudsman office and profession. Featuring case studies from Europe, Canada, Asia, Africa, Latin America and Australia, chapters provide a comprehensive global perspective on the issues at hand. This unique Research Handbook will be of great value to researchers in the fields of public law, socio-legal studies and alternative dispute resolution who have an interest in the ombudsman. It will also be a valuable resource for policymakers and practitioners, particularly those working within ombudsman offices.
In this timely book, Randy J. Kozel develops a theory of precedent designed to enhance the stability and impersonality of constitutional law. Kozel contends that the prevailing approach to precedent in American law is undermined by principled disagreements among judges over the proper means and ends of constitutional interpretation. The structure and composition of the doctrine all but guarantee that conclusions about the durability of precedent will track individual views about whether decisions are right or wrong, and whether mistakes are harmful or benign. This is a serious challenge, but it also reveals a path toward maintaining legal continuity even as judges come and go. Kozel's account of precedent should be read by anyone interested in the nature of the judicial role and the trajectory of constitutional law.
You may like...
Administrative law in South Africa
Cora Hoexter Paperback
The Bill Of Rights Handbook
I Currie, J.De Waal Paperback (7)
Administrative Justice in South Africa…
Scott on cession: A treatise on the law…
Susan Scott Paperback
Immigration Law in South Africa
Fatima Khan Paperback
Provincial And Local Government Reform…
Tinashe C. Chigwata Paperback
Research Handbook on Remote Warfare
Jens David Ohlin Paperback R1,002 Discovery Miles 10 020
Explanatory dictionary of politics…
Albert Venter, Susan Botha, … Paperback
Class Action - In Search of a Larger…
Charles Abrahams Paperback
Afoqt Secrets Study Guide - Afoqt Test…
Afoqt Exam Secrets Test Prep Paperback