It is not often acknowledged that the great majority of African refugee movement happens within Africa rather than from Africa to the West. This book examines the specific characteristics and challenges of the refugee situation in Sub-Saharan Africa, offering a new and critical vision on the situation of asylum-seekers and refugees in the African continent. Cristiano d'Orsi considers the international, regional and domestic legal and institutional frameworks linked to refugee protection in Sub-Saharan Africa, and explores the contributions African refugee protection has brought to the cause on a global scale. Key issues covered in the book include the theory and the practice of non-refoulement, an analysis of the phenomenon of mass-influx, the concept of burden-sharing, and the role of freedom fighters. The book goes on to examine the expulsions of refugees and the historical role played by UNHCR in Sub-Saharan Africa. As a work which follows the persecution and legal challenges of those in search of a safe haven, this book will be of great interest and use to researchers and students of immigration and asylum law, international law, human rights, and African studies.

Children make up half of the world's refugees and over 40 per cent of the world's asylum seekers. However, children are largely invisible in historical and contemporary refugee law. Furthermore, there has been very limited interaction between the burgeoning children's rights framework, in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention). This book explores the possibility of a children's rights approach to the interpretation of the Refugee Convention and within that what such an approach might look like. In order to construct a children's rights approach, the conceptualisations of children outside the legal discipline, within international children's rights law and then within refugee law and refugee discourse are analysed. The approach taken is socio-legal and comparative in nature and the suitability of the Refugee Convention as a framework for the interpretation of child claims is examined. The book analyses to what extent the Refugee Convention is capable of dealing with claims from children based on the modern conceptualisation of children, which is underscored by two competing ideologies: the child as a vulnerable object in law to be protected and the child as subject with rights and the capacity to exercise their agency. The influence each regime has had on the other is also analysed. The work discusses how a children's rights approach might improve outcomes for child applicants. The book makes an original contribution to child refugee discourse and as such will be an invaluable resource for academics, researchers and policymakers working in the areas of migration and asylum law, children's rights and international human rights law.

Every liberal democracy has laws or codes against hate speech except the United States. For constitutionalists, regulation of hate speech violates the First Amendment and damages a free society. Against this absolutist view, Jeremy Waldron argues powerfully that hate speech should be regulated as part of our commitment to human dignity and to inclusion and respect for members of vulnerable minorities.

Causing offense by depicting a religious leader as a terrorist in a newspaper cartoon, for example is not the same as launching a libelous attack on a group s dignity, according to Waldron, and it lies outside the reach of law. But defamation of a minority group, through hate speech, undermines a public good that can and should be protected: the basic assurance of inclusion in society for all members. A social environment polluted by anti-gay leaflets, Nazi banners, and burning crosses sends an implicit message to the targets of such hatred: your security is uncertain and you can expect to face humiliation and discrimination when you leave your home.

Free-speech advocates boast of despising what racists say but defending to the death their right to say it. Waldron finds this emphasis on intellectual resilience misguided and points instead to the threat hate speech poses to the lives, dignity, and reputations of minority members. Finding support for his view among philosophers of the Enlightenment, Waldron asks us to move beyond knee-jerk American exceptionalism in our debates over the serious consequences of hateful speech."

E-voting is the use of electronic means in the casting of the vote at political elections or referendums. This book provides an overview of e-voting related case-law worldwide and explains how judicial decisions impact e-voting development. With contributions by renowned experts on thirteen countries, the authors discuss e-voting both from controlled environments, such as voting machines in polling stations, and uncontrolled ones, including internet voting. Each chapter examines a group of country-specific leading judicial decisions on e-voting and their likely impact on its future development. Reference is made to emerging standards on e-voting such as the Recommendation Rec(2004)11 of the Council of Europe, the only international instrument on e-voting regulation, and to other countries' case-law. The work provides a broader, informative and easily accessible perspective on the historical, political and legal aspects of an otherwise very technical subject, and contributes to a better understanding of the significance of case law and its impact in shaping e-voting's future development. The book will be significantly useful to anyone with an interest in e-voting, in particular decision makers and officials, researchers and academia, as well as NGOs and providers of e-voting solutions.

This book examines the antagonistic relationship between new European nationalisms as these often go hand-in-hand with populism, and the phenomenon of migration. Migration has become a significant issue both in Europe and the whole world. Although it has always existed, much of public opinion sees it now as a problem. The latter has been exaggerated through a crisis in hospitality exacerbated by the relatively recently constructed and misplaced feeling of a civilisational threat from islam. Migration is then countered by the escalation of new nationalisms, at least some of which are supported by populism. This book offers an understanding of this conjunction of migration and nationalism in the post-cold war European context. More specifically, the book takes up how the end of the simplified cold war cognitive binary means an unprecedented epistemological confusion and depoliticisation which takes migration as its target, but could resort to other targets too. Discussing the postcolonial background to the new migrations, the book also considers womens' rights, postsocialism and the relevance of the current pandemic, as the issue of migration is addressed in the context of the European crisis-ridden present. This wide-ranging interrogation of how contemporary European migration is conceived and understood will appeal to students, academics, activists, policy makers, and others with interests in contemporary migration, new nationalisms, populism, feminism, colonial, postcolonial, and decolonial issues, as well as socialism and postsocialism.

The European Court of Human Rights has long been part of the most advanced human rights regime in the world. However, the Court has increasingly drawn criticism, with questions raised about its legitimacy and backlog of cases. This book for the first time brings together the critics of the Court and its proponents to debate these issues. The result is a collection which reflects balanced perspectives on the Court's successes and challenges. Judges, academics and policymakers engage constructively with the Court's criticism, developing novel pathways and strategies for the Court to adopt to increase its legitimacy, to amend procedures to reduce the backlog of applications, to improve dialogue with national authorities and courts, and to ensure compliance by member States. The solutions presented seek to ensure the Court's relevance and impact into the future and to promote the effective protection of human rights across Europe. Containing a dynamic mix of high-profile contributors from across Council of Europe member States, this book will appeal to human rights professionals, European policymakers and politicians, law and politics academics and students as well as human rights NGOs. Contributors: L. Bojin, M. Bossuyt, A. Bradley, A. Burkov, N. Burli, D. Davis, K. Dzehtsiarou, J. Fraser, J. Gerards, B. Kerr, P. Mahoney, E. Myjer, I. Opstelten, A. Sajo, A. Terlouw, W. Thomassen, L. Wildhaber, T. Zwart

Unaccompanied minor migrants are underage migrants, who for various reasons leave their country and are separated from their parents or legal/customary guardians. Some of them live entirely by themselves, while others join their relatives or other adults in a foreign country. The concept of the best interests of a child is widely applied in international, national legal documents and several guidelines and often pertains to unaccompanied minor migrants given that they are separated from parents, who are not able to exercise their basic parental responsibilities. This book takes an in-depth look at the issues surrounding the best interests of the child in relation to unaccompanied minor migrants drawing on social, legal and political sciences in order to understand children's rights not only as a matter of positive law but mainly as a social practice depending on personal biographies, community histories and social relations of power. The book tackles the interpretation of the rights of the child and the best interests principle in the case of unaccompanied minor migrants in Europe at political, legal and practical levels. In its first part the book considers theoretical aspects of children's rights and the best interests of the child in relation to unaccompanied minor migrants. Adopting a critical approach to the implementation of the Convention of Rights of a Child authors nevertheless confirm its relevance for protecting minor migrants' rights in practice. Authors deconstruct power relations residing within the discourses of children's rights and best interests, demonstrating that these rights are constructed and decided upon by those in power who make decisions on behalf of those who do not possess authority. Authors further on explore normative and methodological aspects of Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of a Child and its relevance for asylum and migration legislation. The second part of the book goes on to examine the actual legal framework related to unaccompanied minor migrants and implementation of children's' rights and their best interests in the reception, protection, asylum and return procedures. The case studies are based on from the empirical research, on interviews with key experts and unaccompanied minor migrants in Austria, France, Slovenia and United Kingdom. Examining age assessment procedures, unaccompanied minors' survivals strategies and their everyday life in reception centres the contributors point to the discrepancy between the states' obligations to take the best interest of the child into account when dealing with unaccompanied minor migrants, and the lack of formal procedures of best interest determination in practice. The chapters expose weaknesses and failures of institutionalized systems in selected European countries in dealing with unaccompanied children and young people on the move.

The prominent constitutional law scholar's fascinating (and yes, mind-boggling) argument that we don't need the Constitution after all For some, to oppose the Constitution is to oppose the American experiment itself. But leading constitutional scholar Louis Michael Seidman argues that our founding document has long passed its "sell-by" date. It might sound crazy, but Seidman's arguments are both powerful and, well, convincing. As Seidman shows, constitutional skepticism and disobedience have been present from the beginning of American history, even worming their way into the Federalist Papers. And, as Seidman also points out, no one alive today has agreed to be bound by these rules. In From Parchment to Dust, Seidman offers a brief history of the phenomenon of constitutional skepticism and then proceeds to a masterful takedown of our most cherished, constitutionally enshrined institutions and beliefs, from the Supreme Court ("an arrogant elite in robes"), to the very concepts of civil rights, due process, and equal protection-all of which he argues are just pretenses for preserving a fundamentally rigged and inequitable status quo. Rather than rely on the specific wording of a flawed and outdated document, rife with "Madison's mistakes," Seidman proposes instead a version that better reflects our shared values, and leaves it to people currently alive to determine how these values will play out in contemporary society. From Parchment to Dust is a short, sharp, and iconoclastic book questioning the value (and ultimately the hypocrisy) of embracing the Constitution-which, after all, was written more than 230 years ago-as our moral and political lodestar.

This book brings together scholars from various disciplines to explore current issues and trends in the rethinking of migration and citizenship from the perspective of three major immigrant democracies - Australia, Canada, and the United States. These countries share a history of pronounced immigration and emigration, extensive experience with diasporic and mobile communities, and with integrating culturally diverse populations. They also share an approach to automatic citizenship based on the principle of jus soli (as opposed to the traditionally common jus sanguinis of continental Europe), and a comparatively open attitude towards naturalization. Some of these characteristics are now under pressure due to the "restrictive turn" in citizenship and migration worldwide. This volume explores the significance of political structures, political agents and political culture in shaping processes of inclusion and exclusion in these diverse societies. This book was originally published as a special issue of Citizenship Studies.

This revised and updated casebook comprehensively compares the U.S. legal approach to problems of inequality and discrimination with the approaches of a variety of other legal systems around the world, including those in Europe, South Africa, China, Colombia, India and Brazil. This book provides an introduction to theories of equality and sources of equality law, and examines inequality and discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and identity, religion and disability. Key features: Extensive chapter notes add critical context to areas of developing law Analysis of a range of sources: each chapter includes case law, treaty law, statutory law, regulatory law and legal scholarship A comparative problem-based approach, using concrete issues of inequality and discrimination to help students focus on real world concerns Examination of key contested topics such as marriage inequality, the rights of persons with disabilities, affirmative action, reproductive rights, employment discrimination and hate speech A supplementary online course with additional content and guidance for both students and instructors is available through Stanford Law School. Written in a thorough yet accessible style and with contributions from leading international legal scholars, this casebook is ideal for lecture courses, seminars and summer programs in equality and anti-discrimination in law schools, as well as undergraduate courses in law, political science and sociology. Contributors include: D. Allen, P.L. Cherian, D. Collier, J. Damamme, T. Degener, R. Ford, S. Foster, S. Han, K. Loper, S. Misra, D.B. Oppenheimer, M.-C. Pauwels, S. Robin-Olivier, B. Wang, W. Zhou

What explains the explosive growth of school vouchers in the last two decades? In America's Voucher Politics, Ursula Hackett shows that the voucher movement is rooted in America's foundational struggles over religion, race, and the role of government versus the private sector. Drawing upon original datasets, archival materials, and more than one hundred interviews, Hackett shows that policymakers and political advocates use strategic policy design and rhetoric to hide the role of the state when their policy goals become legally controversial. For over sixty years of voucher litigation, white supremacists, accommodationists, and individualists have deployed this strategy of attenuated governance in court. By learning from previous mistakes and anticipating downstream effects, policymakers can avoid painful defeats, gain a secure legal footing, and entrench their policy commitments despite the surging power of rivals. An ideal case study, education policy reflects multiple axes of conflict in American politics and demonstrates how policy learning unfolds over time.

This book tackles a complex area of law, social policy and social work, providing a comprehensive analysis of the theoretical, practical and legal boundaries of State power following safeguarding and child protection referrals in England. The book examines the history, rationale and implications of the current position, concluding that the balance of power is weighted in favour of the State. The Limits of State Power & Private Rights is ground-breaking in its approach to the subject and its detailed, critical analysis. Traditionally the subject matter of the book is considered within a welfare framework. The analysis in this book argues that a policing agenda is embedded within policy but without appropriate safeguards and controls, creating potentially irreconcilable tension described by the author as the 'welfare/policing dichotomy'. This book is of importance to academics, lawyers, social workers, policy makers, practitioners and service users. The book is written so as to be accessible to a multi-disciplinary audience, but is sufficiently detailed so as to be suitable for specialists and non-specialists alike in this subject area. The chapters include introductory and contextual sections as well as doctrinal, theoretical and socio-legal analysis. Although the focus is on the English system, the book is equally applicable to the many worldwide jurisdictions adopting the Anglo/American 'child rights' based framework of child protection. It is also of use as a comparative work in countries where a family support based system is practiced.

A powerful analysis of why lies and falsehoods spread so rapidly now, and how we can reform our laws and policies regarding speech to alleviate the problem. Lying has been with us from time immemorial. Yet today is different-and in many respects worse. All over the world, people are circulating damaging lies, and these falsehoods are amplified as never before through powerful social media platforms that reach billions. Liars are saying that COVID-19 is a hoax. They are claiming that vaccines cause autism. They are lying about public officials and about people who aspire to high office. They are lying about their friends and neighbors. They are trying to sell products on the basis of untruths. Unfriendly governments, including Russia, are circulating lies in order to destabilize other nations, including the United Kingdom and the United States. In the face of those problems, the renowned legal scholar Cass Sunstein probes the fundamental question of how we can deter lies while also protecting freedom of speech. To be sure, we cannot eliminate lying, nor should we try to do so. Sunstein shows why free societies must generally allow falsehoods and lies, which cannot and should not be excised from democratic debate. A main reason is that we cannot trust governments to make unbiased judgments about what counts as "fake news." However, governments should have the power to regulate specific kinds of falsehoods: those that genuinely endanger health, safety, and the capacity of the public to govern itself. Sunstein also suggests that private institutions, such as Facebook and Twitter, have a great deal of room to stop the spread of falsehoods, and they should be exercising their authority far more than they are now doing. As Sunstein contends, we are allowing far too many lies, including those that both threaten public health and undermine the foundations of democracy itself.

Together, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights comprise the constitutional foundation of the United States. These-the oldest governing documents still in use in the world-urgently need an update, just as the constitutions of other countries have been updated and revised. Human Rights Of, By, and For the People brings together lawyers and sociologists to show how globalization and climate change offer an opportunity to revisit the founding documents. Each proposes specific changes that would more closely align US law with international law. The chapters also illustrate how constitutions are embedded in society and shaped by culture. The constitution itself sets up contentious relationships among the three branches of government and between the federal government and each state government, while the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments begrudgingly recognize the civil and political rights of citizens. These rights are described by legal scholars as "negative rights," specifically as freedoms from infringements rather than as positive rights that affirm personhood and human dignity. The contributors to this volume offer "positive rights" instead. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), written in the middle of the last century, inspires these updates. Nearly every other constitution in the world has adopted language from the UDHR. The contributors use intersectionality, critical race theory, and contemporary critiques of runaway economic inequality to ground their interventions in sociological argument.

Hate speech law can be found throughout the world. But it is also the subject of numerous principled arguments, both for and against. These principles invoke a host of morally relevant features (e.g., liberty, health, autonomy, security, non-subordination, the absence of oppression, human dignity, the discovery of truth, the acquisition of knowledge, self-realization, human excellence, civic dignity, cultural diversity and choice, recognition of cultural identity, intercultural dialogue, participation in democratic self-government, being subject only to legitimate rule) and practical considerations (e.g., efficacy, the least restrictive alternative, chilling effects). The book develops and then critically examines these various principled arguments. It also attempts to de-homogenize hate speech law into different clusters of laws/regulations/codes that constrain uses of hate speech, so as to facilitate a more nuanced examination of the principled arguments. Finally, it argues that it is morally fitting for judicial and legislative judgments about the overall warrant of hate speech law to reflect principled compromise. Principled compromise is characterized not merely by compromise over matters of principled concern but also by compromise which is itself governed by ideals of moral duty or civic virtue (e.g., reciprocity, equality, and mutual respect).

Interest in NFIB v. Sebelius has been extraordinarily high, from as soon as the legislation was passed, through lower court rulings, the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari, and the decision itself, both for its substantive holdings and the purported behind-the-scene dynamics. Legal blogs exploded with analysis, bioethicists opined on our collective responsibilities, and philosophers tackled concepts like 'coercion' and the activity/inactivity distinction. This volume aims to bring together scholars from disparate fields to analyze various features of the decision. It comprises over twenty essays from a range of academic disciplines, namely law, philosophy, and political science. Essays are divided into five units: context and history, analyzing the opinions, individual liberty, Medicaid, and future implications.

Public debates about the terms of membership and inclusion have intensified as developed economies increasingly rely on temporary migrant labour. While most agree that temporary migrant workers are entitled to the general protection of employment laws, temporary migrants have, by definition, restricted rights to residence, full social protections and often to occupational and geographic mobility. This book raises important ethical questions about the differential treatment of temporary and unauthorised migrant workers, and permanent residents, and where the line should be drawn between exploitation and legitimate employment. Taking the regulatory reforms of Australia as a key case study, Laurie Berg explores how the influence of immigration law extends beyond its functions in regulating admission to and exclusion from a country. Berg examines the ways in which immigration law and enforcement reconfigure the relationships between migrant workers and employers, producing uncertain and coercive working conditions. In presenting an analytical approach to issues of temporary labour migration, the book develops a unique theoretical framework, contending that the concept of precariousness is a more fruitful way than equality or vulnerability to evaluate and address issues of temporary migrant labour. The book will be of great interest to scholars and practitioners of immigration law and employment law and policy.

The continuum of exploitation that has historically defined the everyday of domestic work - exclusion from employment and social security standards and precarious migration status - has frequently been neglected. It is primarily the moments of crisis, incidents of human trafficking, slavery or forced labour, that have captured the attention of human rights law. Only recently has human rights law has begun to address the structured inequalities and exclusions that define the domain of domestic work. This book addresses the specific position of domestic workers in the context of evolving human rights norms. Drawing upon a broad range of case studies, this book presents a thorough examination of key issues such as the commodification of care, the impact of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights on 'primary care providers', as well as the effect that trends in migration law have on migrant domestic workers. This volume will be of interest to lawyers, academics and policy makers in the fields of human rights, migration, and gender studies.

Just over 50 years ago, several African countries drew up new constitutions that included additions such as the Protocol on the Rights of Women. Decades later, has constitutional reform brought gender equality to women in Africa? And what does gender equality mean in the everyday lives of women on the continent? The contributors to this volume provide insights into women's rights in seven African countries: Cote d'Ivoire, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, and Uganda. Each looks at the causes, context, and consequences of the struggle to uphold women's rights. Their case studies illustrate property-grabbing in Malawi, women's citizenship in Nigeria, and the rise of hate crimes and sexual violence against black lesbians in South Africa, among other issues.

The right to freedom of religion or belief, as enshrined in international human rights documents, is unique in its formulation in that it provides protection for the enjoyment of the rights "in community with others". This book explores the notion of the collective dimension of freedom of religion or belief with a view to advance the protection of this right. The book considers Turkey which provides a useful test case where both the domestic legislation can be assessed against international standards, while at the same time lessons can be drawn for the improvement of the standard of international review of the protection of the collective dimension of freedom of religion or belief. The book asks two main questions: what is the scope and nature of protection afforded to the collective dimension of freedom of religion or belief in international law, and, secondly, how does the protection of the collective dimension of freedom of religion or belief in Turkey compare and contrast to international standards? In doing so it seeks to identify how the standard of international review of the collective dimension of freedom of religion can be improved.

Not so long ago, being aggressively "pro-free speech" was as closely associated with American political liberalism as being pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, or pro-gun control. With little notice, this political dynamic has been shaken to the core. The Right's First Amendment examines how conservatives came to adopt and co-opt constitutional free speech rights. In the 1960s, free speech on college campuses was seen as a guarantee for social agitators, hippies, and peaceniks. Today, for many conservatives, it represents instead a crucial shield that protects traditionalists from a perceived scourge of political correctness and liberal oversensitivity. Over a similar period, free market conservatives have risen up to embrace a once unknown, but now cherished, liberty: freedom of commercial expression. What do these changes mean for the future of First Amendment interpretation? Wayne Batchis offers a fresh entry point into these issues by grounding his study in both political and legal scholarship. Surveying six decades of writings from the preeminent conservative publication National Review alongside the evolving constitutional law and ideological predispositions of Supreme Court justices deciding these issues, Batchis asks the conservative political movement to answer to its judicial logic, revealing how this keystone of our civic American beliefs now carries a much more complex and nuanced political identity.

This book describes the experiences of undocumented migrants, all around the world, bringing to life the challenges they face from the moment they consider leaving their country of origin, until the time they are deported back to it. Drawing on a broad array of academic studies, including law, interpretation and translation studies, border studies, human rights, communication, critical discourse analysis and sociology, Robert Barsky argues that the arrays of actions that are taken against undocumented migrants are often arbitrary, and exercised by an array of officials who can and do exercise considerable discretion, both positive and negative. Employing insights from a decade-long research project, Barsky also finds that every stop along the migrant's pathway into, and inside of, the host country is strewn with language issues, relating to intercultural communication, interpretation, gossip, hearsay, and the challenges of peddling of linguistic wares in the social discourse marketplace. These language issues are almost always impediments to anodyne or productive interactions with host country officials, particularly on the "front-lines" where migrants encounter border patrol and law enforcement officers without adequate means of communicating their situation or understanding their rights. Since undocumented people are categorized as 'illegal', they can be subjected to abuse and exploitation by host country officials, who can choose to either tolerate or punish them on the basis of unpredictable, changeable, and even illusory or "arbitrary" laws and regulations. Citing experts at every level of the undocumented immigrant apparatuses worldwide, from public defenders to interpreters, Barsky concludes that the only viable policy to address prevailing abuses and inequalities is to move towards open borders, an approach that would address prevailing issues and, surprisingly, provide security and economic benefits to both host and home countries.

The Emergency Detention Act, Title II of the Internal Security Act of 1950, is the only law in American history to legalize preventive detention. It restricted the freedom of a certain individual or a group of individuals based on actions that may be taken that would threaten the security of a nation or of a particular area. Yet the Act was never enforced before it was repealed in 1971. Masumi Izumi links the Emergency Detention Act with Japanese American wartime incarceration in her cogent study, The Rise and Fall of America's Concentration Camp Law. She dissects the entangled discourses of race, national security, and civil liberties between 1941 and 1971 by examining how this historical precedent generated "the concentration camp law" and expanded a ubiquitous regime of surveillance in McCarthyist America. Izumi also shows how political radicalism grew as a result of these laws. Japanese Americas were instrumental in forming grassroots social movements that worked to repeal Title II. The Rise and Fall of America's Concentration Camp Law is a timely study in this age of insecurity where issues of immigration, race, and exclusion persist.

Europeanization of Judicial Review argues that the higher complexity of the political framework in which laws are made today leads to less well-designed laws and loop-holes, allowing politicians to leave decisions to the courts. The higher complexity of the political framework is a result of the need in the EU to consider both national and European legal and political rules when phrasing new laws. Both to decrease the complexity in the design of legislation and to preserve the ideal of the rule of law, the courts now are more likely to rule laws unconstitutional. The book employs a wide range of quantitative and qualitative methods to collect new data about the German, Austrian, and Italian constitutional courts over the last four decades. These three courts have a comparable history, theoretical background, and structure while differing in two key components: length of EU membership and legitimacy perception. Corkin employs multi-method research based on over fifty interviews with judges, politicians and civil servants; content analysis of abstract judicial review cases over three decades; and a database of over 300 variables relating to the courts and their surroundings. Her data reveals that in abstract judicial review, and in the wider political arena, political culture has become more confrontational due to attitude changes in politicians and judges. These attitude changes can be directly linked to the EU and have wide-ranging implications for legitimacy, democracy and political methodology. Presenting a bridge between the revitalized realist and legalist debate, Europeanization of Judicial Review will contribute to socio-legal theory, literature on comparative courts, and both new institutionalism and Europeanization theory.

Drawing on a postcolonial legal history of the United States' territorial expansionism, this book provides an analysis of the foundations of its global empire. Charles R. Venator-Santiago argues that the United States has developed three traditions of territorial expansionism with corresponding constitutional interpretations, namely colonialist, imperialist, and global expansionist. This book offers an alternative interpretation of the origins of US global expansion, suggesting it began with the tradition of territorial expansionism following the 1898 Spanish-American War to legitimate the annexation of Puerto Rico and other non-contiguous territories. The relating constitutional interpretation grew out of the 1901 Insular Cases in which the Supreme Court coined the notion of an unincorporated territory to describe the 1900 Foraker Act's normalization of the prevailing military territorial policies. Since then the United States has invoked the ensuing precedents to legitimate a wide array of global policies, including the 'war on terror'. Puerto Rico and the Origins of US Global Empire: The Disembodied Shade combines a unique study of Puerto Rican legal history with a new interpretation of contemporary US policy. As such, it provides a valuable resource for students and scholars of the legal and historical disciplines, especially those with a specific interest in American and postcolonial studies.