When nine Vietnamese women arrived at Virginia Lynn Sudbury's small law office in Pago Pago, on the island of Tutuila in the territory of American Samoa, she wasn't certain she would take the case. The women, workers at the Daewoosa garment factory, were trying to get the company to pay them their promised wages. She decided to take the case, however--not knowing that it would take years to resolve.

Sweatshops in Paradise tells the first-person account of the notorious garment factory/sweatshop class-action lawsuit Nga v. Daewoosa, which took place in the territory of American Samoa from 1999 until 2001. This precedent-setting case drew international attention to the issues surrounding involuntary servitude and trafficking in human beings in far-flung US territories.

Written by Sudbury, who acted as the lead plaintiff attorney, Sweatshops in Paradise narrates the story of some three hundred Vietnamese and Chinese workers who were brought to American Samoa to work in the Daewoosa garment factory. There, they encountered civil injustices, rampant abuse, and imprisonment at the hands of the Korean factory owner and the local government.

Chronicled in a frank, disarming, and at times humorous manner, Sweatshops in Paradise draws upon hearing transcripts, newspaper articles, and narratives from the largest lawsuit of American Samoa's history. It provides a poignant accounting of the fears of the workers and the abuses they endured, the impunity of the factory owner, and the incomprehensible neglect of the evolving and tragic situation by the American Samoa government.

'Long admired for her pioneering work on gender, neo-liberalism and human rights, in this volume Ratna Kapur builds on that scholarship to offer a bold and wide ranging set of arguments that will add immensely to the many current debates about human rights and their efficacy in this age of inequality. Kapur' s trenchant critique of rights and her vision of an alternative to the liberal concept of freedom offer strikingly original arguments that make this an indispensable volume for all who are interested in the future of human rights.' - Tony Anghie, National University of Singapore and University of Utah, US 'Gender, Alterity and Human Rights: Freedom in a Fishbowl is located within the best of critical theory traditions - thinking and rethinking orthodoxies around sexuality, rights and freedoms. Kapur not only deploys a late Foucauldian rethinking of freedom, but inherits the very spirit of intellectual engagement - of ''shak(ing) up habitual ways of working and thinking, dissipate(ing) conventional familiarities, to reevaluate rules and institutions'' (Foucault). It is a compelling, provocative read that will make its readers rethink what they think they already know.' - Brenda Cossman, University of Toronto, Canada 'Ratna Kapur is one of the most important international legal scholars working today. Gender, Alterity and Human Rights is brilliant, provocative and ground breaking - I cannot think of any other book published today that centers radically 'other' approaches to political and ethical agency as the epistemological anchor for analysis of international law. She advances this ambitious new ground by showing how dominant approaches to human rights and feminism are themselves invested in political subjectivities and agendas that seek to redeem international law and authorize global governance. With theoretical rigor and a radical sensibility, she quarries through material as diverse as human rights case law and Sufi poetry to excavate the plurality of ways in which freedom is envisioned, challenged and inhabited.' - Vasuki Nesiah, New York University, US Human rights are axiomatic with liberal freedom. This book builds on the critique of this mainstream and official position on human rights, drawing attention to how human rights have been deployed to advance political and cultural intents rather than bring about freedom for disenfranchised groups. Its approach is unique insofar as it focuses on queer, feminist and postcolonial human rights advocacy, exposing how such interventions have at times advanced neo-liberal agendas and new forms of imperialism, and enabled a carceral politics rather than producing freedom for their constituencies. Through a focus on campaigns for same-sex marriage, ending violence against women, and the Islamic veil bans in liberal democracies, human rights emerge as forms of governance that operate through normative prescriptions, which bind even as they purport to free, and establish a hierarchy of the human subject: who is human and who is not; who qualifies for rights and who does not. This book argues that the futurity of human rights rests in a transformative engagement with non-liberal registers of freedom beyond the narrow confines of the liberal fishbowl. This book will have a global appeal for students and academics concerned with international and human rights law, jurisprudence, critical legal theory, gender studies, postcolonial studies, feminist legal theory, queer theory, religious studies, and philosophy. It will appeal to political activists and policymakers in the global justice arena concerned with the freedom of disenfranchised groups, human rights, gender justice, and the rights sexual and religious minorities.

According to the accepted legal theory, the American colonists claimed the English common law as their birthright, brought with them its general principles and adopted so much of it as was applicable to their condition. Although this theory is universally adopted by the courts, a close study of the subject reveals among the early colonists a far different attitude toward the common law from that which is usually attributed to them. In none of the colonies, perhaps, was this more marked than in early Massachusetts. Here the binding force of English law was denied, and a legal system largely different came into use. It is the purpose of this work to trace the development of that system during the period of the first charter.

Among the rights conferred on the citizens of Europe by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms is the right to good administration. It is anticipated that the new Reform Constitutional Treaty will operate to make the Charter and its rights legally binding. This is the first time that any legal system has proclaimed such a right and then sought to constitutionalise it. Whether the right to good administration under the Charter represents a new right, and, if such a right exists, whether it varies according to whether the executive is mandated to control or steward, is the subject matter of this thoughtful, unblinkered book.Grounding her exposition in a deeply-informed engagement with relevant primary and secondary sources, the author exposes the serious difficulties and contradictions in the concept of the right to good administration. She demonstrates that the features of good administration cannot be fixed or fully enunciated, but are identified only when the conduct of the administration fails to reach an acceptable standard, a standard that varies over time and context. And in the modes of the concept most often embraced, such as the notion of citizen as consumer with marketplace choice, and the notion of consultation, a form of participatory democracy which privileges those individuals and communities who have the political sophistication to organize themselves and further marginalize large sectors of unorganized society; she finds a virtual denial of the democratic concept of citizen as sovereign, the creator of state power who can dictate the exact limits to be placed on personal autonomy.The extraordinary clarity and conviction of the author's approach is apparent in the details of her presentation, which include analysis of the following factors among others: the enforceable content of the right, including the role of the European Ombudsman; the relationship between good governance and good administration; the duties of the Commission as administrator; the uncertain reach of the concept of maladministration; damages in compensation actions as remedy for breach of good administration; pre-Charter principles of good administration as agreed in the Council of Europe and developed by the Courts; and the right of access to documentation, especially as it relates to the policy of language diversity. The final chapters examine the role of the right to good administration in the fraught contexts of competition law, Community finances, and the European environmental framework. This far-seeing study breaks new ground in the ever more politicized debate over the future of the European Union. As good administration is the mechanism by which the principles of good governance are to be delivered, the detailed attention given to this subject here is more than warranted. It is sure to be of exceptional value to all concerned with the development of an administrative institution of integrity and accountability in EU governance.

This book deals with one of the most important issues of philosophy of law and constitutional thought: how to understand clashes of fundamental rights, such as the conflict between free speech and privacy. The main argument of this book is that much can be learned about the nature of fundamental legal rights by examining them through the lens of conflicts among such rights, and criticizing the views of scholars and jurists who have discussed both fundamental legal rights and the nature of conflicts among them.
Theories of rights are necessarily abstract, aiming at providing the best possible answers to pressing social problems. Yet such theories must also respond to the real and changing dilemmas of the day. Taking up the problem of conflicting rights, Zucca seeks a theory of rights that can guide us to a richer, more responsive approach to rights discourse.
The idea of constitutional rights is one of the most powerful tools to advance justice in the Western tradition. But as this book demonstrates, even the most ambitious theory of rights cannot satisfactorily address questions of conflicting rights. How, for instance, can we fully secure privacy when it clashes with free speech? To what extent can our societies assist people in dying without compromising the protection of life? Exploring the limitations of the rights discourse in these areas, Zucca questions the role of law in settling ethical dilemmas helping to clarify thinking about the limitations of rights discourse.

This book is an essential resource for anyone who wants to understand race in America, drawing on research from a variety of fields to answer frequently asked questions regarding race relations, systemic racism, and racial inequality. This work is part of a series that uses evidence-based documentation to examine the veracity of claims and beliefs about high-profile issues in American culture and politics. This particular volume examines the true state of race relations and racial inequality in the United States, drawing on empirical research in the hard sciences and social sciences to answer frequently asked questions regarding race and inequality. The book refutes falsehoods, misunderstandings, and exaggerations surrounding these topics and confirms the validity of other assertions. Assembling this empirical research into one accessible place allows readers to better understand the scholarly evidence on such high-interest topics as white privilege, racial bias in criminal justice, media bias, housing segregation, educational inequality, disparities in employment, racial stereotypes, and personal attitudes about race and ethnicity in America. The authors draw from scholarly research in biology, genetics, medicine, sociology, psychology, anthropology, and economics (among many other fields) to answer these questions, and in doing so they provide readers with the information to enter any conversation about American race relations in the 21st century as informed citizens. Addresses beliefs and claims regarding race and ethnicity in America in an easy-to-navigate question-and-answer format Draws from empirical research in a variety of scholarly fields and presents those findings in a single, lay-friendly location to aid understanding of complex issues Provides readers with leads to conduct further research in extensive Further Reading sections for each entry Examines claims made by individuals and groups of all political backgrounds and ideologies

A great deal has been written on the relationship between politics and law. Legislation, as a source of law, is often highly political, and is the product of a process or the creation of officials often closely bound into party politics. Legislation is also one of the exclusive powers of the state. As such, legislation is plainly both practical and inevitably political; at the same time most understandings of the relationship between law and politics have been overwhelmingly theoretical. In this light, public law is often seen as part of the political order or as inescapably partisan. We know relatively little about the real impact of law on politicians through their legal advisers and civil servants. How do lawyers in government see their roles and what use do they make of law? How does politics actually affect the drafting of legislation or the making of policy? This volume will begin to answer these and other questions about the practical, day-to-day relationship between law and politics in a number of settings. It includes chapters by former departmental legal advisers, drafters of legislation, law reformers, judges and academics, who focus on what actually happens when law meets politics in government.

Since America's founding, the U.S. Supreme Court had issued a vast number of decisions on a staggeringly wide variety of subjects. And hundreds of judges have occupied the bench. Yet as Cass R. Sunstein, the eminent legal scholar and bestselling co-author of Nudge, points out, almost every one of the Justices fits into a very small number of types regardless of ideology: the hero, the soldier, the minimalist, and the mute. Heroes are willing to invoke the Constitution to invalidate state laws, federal legislation, and prior Court decisions. They loudly embrace first principles and are prone to flair, employing dramatic language to fundamentally reshape the law. Soldiers, on the other hand, are skeptical of judicial power, and typically defer to decisions made by the political branches. Minimalists favor small steps and only incremental change. They worry that bold reversals of long-established traditions may be counterproductive, producing a backlash that only leads to another reversal. Mutes would rather say nothing at all about the big constitutional issues, and instead tend to decide cases on narrow grounds or keep controversial cases out of the Court altogether by denying standing. As Sunstein shows, many of the most important constitutional debates are in fact contests between the four Personae. Whether the issue involves slavery, gender equality, same-sex marriage, executive power, surveillance, or freedom of speech, debates have turned on choices made among the four Personae-choices that derive as much from psychology as constitutional theory. Sunstein himself defends a form of minimalism, arguing that it is the best approach in a self-governing society of free people. More broadly, he casts a genuinely novel light on longstanding disputes over the proper way to interpret the constitution, demonstrating that behind virtually every decision and beneath all of the abstract theory lurk the four Personae. By emphasizing the centrality of character types, Sunstein forces us to rethink everything we know about how the Supreme Court works.

Despite several decades' worth of explicit directives, green papers, white papers, proposals, and communications from the European Commission, the actual enforcement of competition law across the Member States today is rife with shifting patterns that escape a clearly bounded framework. The underlying cause of this disarray, the authors of this deeply engaged work contend, lies in a host of legal uncertainties scattered around the intersection where private enforcement encounters the mechanisms of decentralized public enforcement - an area where a number of general as well as special questions of EU competition law, even its very goals and principles, rise into prominence.

Germany's Constitution - the Basic Law of 23 May 1949 - created a democratic constitution which, despite amendments, has held up over the years, even providing the legal basis for German reunification in 1990. When it was written, the Basic Law was initially regarded as a temporary solution which would last until a pan-German constitution could be created, but over the years it has grown to become a mainstay of post-war stability and has even become one of Germany's most successful exports. Foreign scholars are particularly interested in the German conception of fundamental rights and the mechanisms in place for enforcing them in the courts, as well as in Germany's federal structure. Making and applying administrative law and working alongside the system of EU law are also subjects of great interest. This book, developed by a group of scholars in honour of the 60th anniversary of the Basic Law, presents examples of fundamental aspects of current scholarly debate. The analyses found in this book present the latest scholarly discussions, specifically for a foreign audience, touching upon constitutional law, administrative law and the place of the Federal Republic within the system of European Union law, with constitutional law providing the constant framework.

View the Table of Contents. Read the Preface.

Praise for the 10th Anniversary Edition

"White by Law remains one of the most significant and generative entries in the crowded field of 'whiteness studies.' Ian Haney LA3pez has crafted a brilliant study, not merely of how 'race' figures in the juridical logic of U.S. citizenship, but of the ways in which law fully participates in the wholesale manufacture of those naturalized groupings we know as 'races.' A terribly important work."
--Matthew Frye Jacobson, author of "Roots Too: White Ethnic Revival in Post-Civil Rights America"

"Ten years after its initial publication, White by Law remains the definitive treatment of the naturalization cases, and provides a compelling account of the role of law in constructing race. A wonderful combination of thematic development and historical excavation, one leaves this revised edition with a thoroughgoing understanding of the ways in which citizenship functioned not only to include and exclude but as a process through which people quite literally became white by law."
--Devon W. Carbado, Professor of Law and Associate Dean, UCLA School of Law

"White by Law remains the definitive work on how American law constructed a 'white' race at the turn of the twentieth century. Haney LA3pez has added a chapter to the new edition, a sobering analysis of how, in our own time, 'colorblind' law and policy threaten to perpetuate, not eliminate, racial inequality. A must-read."
--Mae M. Ngai, author of "Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America"

aHere is one work that proved challenging to review with a fresh eye, having been widely reviewed and discussed since itsoriginal publication more than 10 years agoa].While oneas first question upon picking up such a book could easily be awhy bother?a with the re-release of an older work, in this case, the strategy worksa].[T]he addition of the authoras personal narrative in the Preface and his intriguing view into the future with the new conclusion will add to the bookas pedagogical value. In sum, Haney Lopez has provided a piece of scholarship worthy of bringing out a curtain call on its 10th anniversary.a
--"Law and Politics Review"

Praise for the 1st edition:

"Haney LA3pez performs a major service for anyone truly interested in understanding contemporary debates over racial and ethnic politics. . . . A sobering and crucial lesson for a society committed to equality and fairness."
--Martha Minow, Harvard Law School

"This book is remarkable for sheer information value, but draws its analytic power from the emphasis on whiteness to make sense of racial oppression. . . . Haney LA3pez convincingly demonstrates that the US is ideologically white not by accident but by design."
--"Choice"

White by Law was published in 1996 to immense critical acclaim, and established Ian Haney LA3pez as one of the most exciting and talented young minds in the legal academy. The first book to fully explore the social and specifically legal construction of race, White by Law inspired a generation of critical race theorists and others interested in the intersection of race and law in American society. Today, it is used and cited widely by not only legal scholars but many others interested in race, ethnicity, culture, politics, gender, and similar socially fabricated facets of American society.

In thefirst edition of White by Law, Haney LA3pez traced the reasoning employed by the courts in their efforts to justify the whiteness of some and the non-whiteness of others, and revealed the criteria that were used, often arbitrarily, to determine whiteness, and thus citizenship: skin color, facial features, national origin, language, culture, ancestry, scientific opinion, and, most importantly, popular opinion.

Ten years later, Haney LA3pez revisits the legal construction of race, and argues that current race law has spawned a troubling racial ideology that perpetuates inequality under a new guise: colorblind white dominance. In a new, original essay written specifically for the 10th anniversary edition, he explores this racial paradigm and explains how it contributes to a system of white racial privilege socially and legally defended by restrictive definitions of what counts as race and as racism, and what doesn't, in the eyes of the law. The book also includes a new preface, in which Haney LA3pez considers how his own personal experiences with white racial privilege helped engender White by Law.

Judges don't just discover the law, they create it. A renowned and much-used analysis of the process of judicial decision-making, now in a library-quality cloth edition with modern formatting and presentation. Includes embedded page numbers from the original 1921 edition for continuity of citations and syllabi. Features a new, explanatory Foreword by Justice Cardozo's premier biographer, Andrew L. Kaufman, senior professor at Harvard Law School and author of "Cardozo" (Harvard Univ. Press, 1998).Justice Benjamin Nathan Cardozo (1870-1938) offered the world a candid and self-conscious study of how judges decide cases and the law - they are lawmakers and not just law-appliers, he knew - all drawn from his insights and experience on the bench in a way that no judge had done before. Asked the basic questions, "What is it that I do when I decide a case? To what sources of information do I appeal for guidance?," Cardozo answered them in his methodical, rich, and timeless prose, explaining the proper use of such decisional tools as logic and analogy to precedent; analysis of history and tradition; application of public policy, community mores, and sociology; and even the subconscious forces that drive judges' decisions. This book has impacted the introspective examination of the lawmaking process of the courts in a way no other book has had. It continues to be read today by lawyers and judges, law students and scholars, historians and political scientists, and philosophers - among others interested in how judges really think and the tools they employ.Judges are people, and lawmakers, too. "The great tides and currents which engulf the rest of men, do not turn aside in their course, and pass the judges by. We like to figure to ourselves the processes of justice as coldly objective and impersonal. The law, conceived of as a real existence, dwelling apart and alone, speaks, through the voices of priests and ministers, the words which they have no choice except to utter. ...It has a lofty sound; it is well and finely said; but it can never be more than partly true." Beyond precedential cases and tradition, judges make choices, using methods of analysis and biases that ought to be examined.Famous at the time for his trenchant and fluid opinions as a Justice on New York's highest court - he is still studied on questions of torts, contracts, and business law - and later a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Cardozo filled the lecture hall at Yale when he finally answered the frank query into what judges do and how do they do it. The lectures became a landmark book and a source for all other studies of the ways of a judge. Brought to a new generation by Professor Kaufman, and presented as part of the properly formatted Legal Legends Series of Quid Pro Books, this edition is the understandable and usable rendition of a classic work of law and politics.

In a stinging dissent to a 1961 Supreme Court decision that allowed the Illinois state bar to deny admission to prospective lawyers if they refused to answer political questions, Justice Hugo Black closed with the memorable line, "We must not be afraid to be free." Black saw the First Amendment as the foundation of American freedom--the guarantor of all other Constitutional rights. Yet since free speech is by nature unruly, people fear it. The impulse to curb or limit it has been a constant danger throughout American history.
In We Must Not Be Afraid to Be Free, Ron Collins and Sam Chaltain, two noted free speech scholars and activists, provide authoritative and vivid portraits of free speech in modern America. The authors offer a series of engaging accounts of landmark First Amendment cases, including bitterly contested cases concerning loyalty oaths, hate speech, flag burning, student anti-war protests, and McCarthy-era prosecutions. The book also describes the colorful people involved in each case--the judges, attorneys, and defendants--and the issues at stake. Tracing the development of free speech rights from a more restrictive era--the early twentieth century--through the Warren Court revolution of the 1960s and beyond, Collins and Chaltain not only cover the history of a cherished ideal, but also explain in accessible language how the law surrounding this ideal has changed over time.
Essential for anyone interested in this most fundamental of our rights, We Must Not Be Afraid to Be Free provides a definitive and lively account of our First Amendment and the price courageous Americans have paid to secure them.

Originally published: London: William Du-Gard, 1652. xlvi], 500, 10], 37 pp. Reprint of the first edition in English. Mare Clausum (Dominion of the Sea) is the most famous British reply to the argument of Grotius's Mare Liberum, which denied the validity of England's claim to the high seas south and east of England. John Selden 1584-1654] argued that England's jurisdiction extends, in fact, to all waters surrounding the isles. His use of common-law principles to rebut Grotius's philosophical argument is quite impressive. Holdsworth notes that his case was enriched by "a vast historical knowledge, replete with references to the customs of peoples from the times of the Greeks to his time." Holdsworth, A History of English Law V: 10-11.