Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., was one of the most influential jurists of his time. From the antebellum era and the Civil War through the First World War and into the New Deal years, Holmes' long life and career as a Supreme Court Justice spanned an eventful period of American history, as the country went from an agrarian republic to an industrialized world power. In this concise, engaging book, Susan-Mary Grant puts Holmes' life in national context, exploring how he both shaped and reflected his changing country. She examines the impact of the Civil War on his life and his thinking, his role in key cases ranging from the issue of free speech in Schenck v. United States to the infamous ruling in favor of eugenics in Buck v. Bell, showing how behind Holmes' reputation as a liberal justice lay a more complex approach to law that did not neatly align with political divisions. Including a selection of key primary documents, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. introduces students of U.S., Civil War, and legal history to a game-changing figure and his times.

Inside the American Legal Mind:An International Practitioner Guide to American Legal Reasoning clearly explains how to navigate within U.S. legal practice. A combination of common law legal history with the straight-shooting American style has resulted in an approach to issue analysis that is structurally different from other fields and from the civil law systems common in other countries. Precedent drives the interpretive process, providing the pillars upon which an American lawyer builds a case. Understanding how to capture relevant aspects of precedent, merge those aspects with precedent from seemingly distinct cases, and apply the resulting formula to a given fact pattern can be a harrowing experience for anyone untrained in American legal thinking. This book bridges that gap for aspiring lawyers in America as well as for foreign legal practitioners. Fandl clearly and concisely demonstrates how to research, analyze, and ultimately condense legal ideas into written form in the American legal style. Suitable for undergraduates in U.S. Criminal Justice programs and for LL.M. courses, as well as for continuing education for professionals.

This book offers an innovative approach to studying 'judicial activism' in the Indian context in tracing its history and relevance since 1773. While discussing the varying roles of the judiciary, it delineates the boundaries of different organs of the State - judiciary, executive and legislature - and highlights the points where these boundaries have been breached, especially through judicial interventions in parliamentary affairs and their role in governance and policy. Including a fascinating range of sources such as legal cases, books, newspapers, periodicals, lectures, historical texts and records, the author presents the complex sides of the arguments persuasively, and contributes to new ways of understanding the functioning of the judiciary in India. This paperback edition, with a new Afterword, updates the debates around the raging questions facing the Indian judiciary. It will be of great interest to students and scholars of law, political science and history, as well as legal practitioners and the general reader.

In Community Punishment: European perspectives, the authors place punishment in the community under the spotlight by exploring the origins, evolution and adaptations of supervision in 11 European jurisdictions. For most people, punishment in the criminal justice system is synonymous with imprisonment. Yet, both in Europe and in the USA, the numbers of people under some form of penal supervision in the community far exceeds the numbers in prison, and many prisoners are released under supervision. Written and edited by leading scholars in the field, this collection advances the sociology of punishment by illuminating the neglected but crucial phenomenon of 'mass supervision'. As well as putting criminological and penological theories to the test in an examination of their ability to explain the evolution of punishment beyond the prison, and across diverse states, the contributors to this volume also assess the appropriateness of the term 'community punishment' in different parts of Europe. Engaging in a serious exploration of common themes and differences in the jurisdictions included in the collection, the authors go on to examine how 'community punishment' came into being in their jurisdiction and how its institutional forms and practices have been legitimated and re-legitimated in response to shifting social, cultural and political contexts. This book is essential reading for academics and students involved in the study of both community punishment and comparative penology, but will also be of great interest to criminal justice policymakers, managers and practitioners.

In Community Punishment: European perspectives, the authors place punishment in the community under the spotlight by exploring the origins, evolution and adaptations of supervision in 11 European jurisdictions. For most people, punishment in the criminal justice system is synonymous with imprisonment. Yet, both in Europe and in the USA, the numbers of people under some form of penal supervision in the community far exceeds the numbers in prison, and many prisoners are released under supervision. Written and edited by leading scholars in the field, this collection advances the sociology of punishment by illuminating the neglected but crucial phenomenon of 'mass supervision'. As well as putting criminological and penological theories to the test in an examination of their ability to explain the evolution of punishment beyond the prison, and across diverse states, the contributors to this volume also assess the appropriateness of the term 'community punishment' in different parts of Europe. Engaging in a serious exploration of common themes and differences in the jurisdictions included in the collection, the authors go on to examine how 'community punishment' came into being in their jurisdiction and how its institutional forms and practices have been legitimated and re-legitimated in response to shifting social, cultural and political contexts. This book is essential reading for academics and students involved in the study of both community punishment and comparative penology, but will also be of great interest to criminal justice policymakers, managers and practitioners.

The most punitive era in American history reached its apex in the 1990s, but the trend has reversed in recent years. Smart on Crime: The Struggle to Build a Better American Penal System examines the factors causing this dramatic turnaround. It relates and echoes the increasing need and desire on the part of actors in the American government system to construct a penal system that is more rational and humane. Author Garrick L. Percival points out that the prison boom did not naturally emerge as a governmental response to increasing crime rates. Instead, political forces actively built and shaped the growth of a more aggressive and populated penal system. He is optimistic that the shifting political forces surrounding crime and punishment can now reform the system, explaining how current political actors can craft more constructive and just policies and programs. The book shows how rationality and humanitarianism lead to a penal system that imprisons fewer people, does less harm to the lives of individual offenders and those close to them, and is less expensive to maintain. The book presents empirical data to concretely demonstrate what is working and what is not in today's penal system. It closely examines policies and practices in Texas, Ohio, and California as comparative illustrations on what progress has been made or needs to be made in penal systems across the United States. The book includes a comprehensive discussion of highlighted issues, and relates more than two dozen interviews with pivotal political actors who clarify why there is a major shift underway in the American penal system. Their insights reveal paths that can be taken to improve the current penal system.

In deciding the abortion and physician assisted suicide cases, a majority of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court drew on medical knowledge to inform their opinions while dismissing the distinctively different knowledge offered by patients. Following the legal norms derived from the ethic of justice, the CourtOs deference toward the Ouniversal,O Oimpartial,O and OreasonedO knowledge of the medical profession and its disregard of the Oparticular,O Oinvolved,O and OemotionalO knowledge of patients seemed inevitable as well as justified. But was it? This book argues that it is both possible and proper to develop a jurisprudence capable of incorporating the knowledge of patients. Drawing on feminist scholarship, this book proposes a model for a Ocaring jurisprudenceO that integrates the ethic of justice and the ethic of care to ensure that patientsO knowledge is included in judicial decision making.

Ten years ago there were no faith-based units in prisons outside South America. Today, they are spreading all over the world, including the United States, Europe and the Commonwealth. My Brother's Keeper is the first major study of a global phenomenon. Exploring the roots of faith-based units in South America, it explains why the Prison Service of England and Wales set up the first Christian-based unit in the western world in 1997 - and its rapid expansion. It also explains how, at exactly the same time, the United States introduced Christian-based units - and why they were complimented by interfaith and multifaith initiatives. At the heart of My Brother's Keeper is an interior account of life inside four Christian-based prison units in England. It draws on the findings of a detailed evaluation conducted by the authors for the Home Office, Prison Service and Kainos Community between 2000 and 2001, including an updated reconviction study. It is an authoritative account of an innovative programme. Its analysis of what works and what doesn't in faith-based units around the world makes My Brother's Keeper a valuable roadmap for all who care about improving prison conditions. It presents a vision of justice that is not just concerned with building more prisons but with rebuilding more prisoners. It argues that by making prisons more human and punishment more humane, faith-based units can be of value - and keep faith in prisons.

Since it first appeared in 1960, The Supreme Court Review (SCR) has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court's most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists. This year's volume features prominent scholars assessing major legal events, including: Mark Tushnet on President Trump's "Muslim Ban" Kate Andrias on Union Fees in the Public Sector Cass R. Sunstein on Chevron without Chevron Tracey Maclin on the Fourth Amendment and Unauthorized Drivers Frederick Schauer on Precedent Pamela Karlan on Gay Equality and Racial Equality Randall Kennedy on Palmer v. Thompson Lisa Marshall Manheim and Elizabeth G. Porter on Voter Suppression Melissa Murray on Masterpiece Cakeshop Vikram David Amar on Commandeering Laura K. Donohue on Carpenter, Precedent, and Originalism Evan Caminker on Carpenter and Stability

Accompanied by a podcast called "The Cannabis Criminology Podcast." As a limited series podcast, the authors will review key aspects of the book and interview scholars and activists working in this area. Very timely as the (potential) legalisation of cannabis has received much attention across the globe in recent decades/years, and this interest is set to continue for many years to come. Most research tends to focus on drugs as a whole, whereas this book focus solely on cannabis, and as such offers the depth needed to grasp the topic more effectively. Fits into several topics/modules within criminology, sociology, law, drug policy and public health. Comprehensive in its coverage, exploring history, frameworks of analysis, evidence to date, key initiatives, and providing examples from relevant jurisdictions.

This book reports on research which investigates the perceptions of ethnic minorities concerning their treatment in the criminal courts. It examines the extent to which ethnic minority defendants and witnesses in both the Crown Court and the magistrates' courts perceived their treatment to have been unfair, whether they believed any unfairness to have been the result of ethnic bias, and whether this had affected their confidence in the criminal courts. The study, carried out by the Oxford Centre for Criminological Research in association with the University of Birmingham for the Lord Chancellor's Department, involved observations of cases and interviews with more than a thousand people (defendants, witnesses, barristers, solicitors, judges, magistrates and others), and focused on courts in Manchester, Birmingham and London. A Fair Hearing? Ethnic minorities in the criminal courts begins by showing how widely held the belief has been that ethnic minorities are discriminated against by the courts and by other agencies in the criminal justice system. It discusses the factors that contributed to this belief, including the findings of the Macpherson Report and the notion of 'institutional racism'. The main part of the book then looks at the institutional setting in which the research took place, the experience of defendants and witnesses, their views about how they were treated by the criminal courts, and the views of others involved in the court process. Final chapters in the book address the issue of sensitivity to ethnicity on the part of judges, magistrates and lawyers. It shows that attitudes and practices are perceived to have changed for the better and examines what more needs to be done to increase the confidence that members of ethnic minorities have in the fairness of the criminal courts.

First Published in 1998. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Although the issue of offender decision-making pervades almost every discussion of crime and law enforcement, only a few comprehensive texts cover and integrate information about the role of decision-making in crime. The Oxford Handbook of Offender Decision Making provide high-quality reviews of the main paradigms in offender decision-making, such as rational choice theory and dual-process theory. It contains up-to-date reviews of empirical research on decision-making in a wide range of decision types including not only criminal initiation and desistance, but also choice of locations, times, targets, victims, methods as well as large variety crimes including homicide, robbery, domestic violence, burglary, street crime, sexual crimes, and cybercrime. Lastly, it provides in-depth treatments of the major methods used to study offender decision-making, including experiments, observation studies, surveys, offender interviews, and simulations. Comprehensive and authoritative, the Handbook will quickly become the primary source of theoretical, methodological, and empirical knowledge about decision-making as it relates to criminal behavior.

This book engages with and advances the current debate on new governance by providing a much-needed analysis of its relationship with the courts. New modes of governance have produced a plethora of instruments and actors at various levels that present a challenge to more traditional forms of command-and-control regulation. In this respect, it is commonly maintained that new governance generally - and political experimentation more broadly - weakens the power of the courts, producing a legitimacy problem for new forms of governance and, perhaps more fundamentally, for law itself. Focusing on the European Union, this book offers a new account of the role of the courts in new governance. Connecting new governance with the conception of deliberative democracy, this book demonstrates how the role of courts has been transformed by the legal and political experimentation currently taking place in the European Union. Drawing on a series of case studies, it is argued that, although deliberations in governance frameworks provide little by way of hard, binding law, these collaborative frameworks nevertheless condition judicial decision making. With far-reaching implications for how we understand the justiciability of 'soft law', participation rights, the legitimacy of governance measures, and the role of courts beyond the nation-state, this book argues that, far from undermining the power of the courts, governance regimes assist their functioning. Its analysis will therefore be of considerable interest for lawyers, political scientists and anyone interested in the transformation of the judiciary in the era of new governance.

This collection marks the 150th anniversary of the Technology and Construction Court by presenting insights into its history and impact. The contributors are current and retired senior judges, renowned academics and leading construction and technology lawyers. The book draws on their different perspectives and approaches to showcase different aspects of the Official Referees and the TCC from its origins in the Judicature Act 1873 through to its modern-day role as an international leader in dispute resolution through litigation, arbitration and adjudication. Different essays consider the role of the TCC in procedural reform and the digital transformation of dispute resolution, building safety, and how it has impacted on doctrinal English law. The book also explores the lives and impact of notable Official Referees and TCC judges from the senior judiciary's perspective, with contributions by Lord Dyson on the transition from the Official Referees to the TCC, Sir Rupert Jackson on the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, Dame Finola O'Farrell on the TCC today, Sir Peter Coulson on Sir Brett Cloutman QC (a Senior Referee who was awarded a Victoria Cross) and Her Honour Frances Kirkham on the court's role in the regions. The creation of a specialist dispute resolution forum for complicated engineering, construction and technological disputes is a foundational milestone in the legal history of construction law in England and Wales. This collection offers a unique insight from the judiciary, practising lawyers and academics into the significance and development of the court.

The U.S. Supreme Court is not a unitary actor and it does not function in a vacuum. It is part of an integrated political system in which its decisions and doctrine must be viewed in a broader context. In some areas, the Court is the lead policy maker. In other areas, the Court fills in the gaps of policy created in the legislative and executive branches. In either instance, the Supreme Court's work is influenced by and in turn influences all three branches of the federal government as well as the interests and opinions of the American people. Pacelle analyzes the Court's interaction in the separation of powers system, detailing its relationship to the presidency, Congress, the bureaucracy, public opinion, interest groups, and the vast system of lower courts. The niche the Court occupies and the role it plays in American government reflect aspects of both the legal and political models. The Court has legal duties and obligations as well as some freedom to exercise its collective political will. Too often those studying the Court have examined it in isolation, but this book urges scholars and students alike to think more broadly and situate the highest court as the "balance wheel" in the American system.

The U.S. Supreme Court is not a unitary actor and it does not function in a vacuum. It is part of an integrated political system in which its decisions and doctrine must be viewed in a broader context. In some areas, the Court is the lead policy maker. In other areas, the Court fills in the gaps of policy created in the legislative and executive branches. In either instance, the Supreme Court's work is influenced by and in turn influences all three branches of the federal government as well as the interests and opinions of the American people. Pacelle analyzes the Court's interaction in the separation of powers system, detailing its relationship to the presidency, Congress, the bureaucracy, public opinion, interest groups, and the vast system of lower courts. The niche the Court occupies and the role it plays in American government reflect aspects of both the legal and political models. The Court has legal duties and obligations as well as some freedom to exercise its collective political will. Too often those studying the Court have examined it in isolation, but this book urges scholars and students alike to think more broadly and situate the highest court as the "balance wheel" in the American system.

A vexing problem in contract law is modification. Two parties sign a contract but before they fully perform, they modify the contract. Should courts enforce the modified agreement? A private remedy is for the parties to write a contract that is robust to hold-up or that makes the facts relevant to modification verifiable. Provisions accomplishing these ends are renegotiation-design and revelation mechanisms. But implementing them requires commitment power. Conventional contract technologies to ensure commitment - liquidated damages - are disfavored by courts and themselves subject to renegotiation. Smart contracts written on blockchain ledgers offer a solution. We explain the basic economics and legal relevance of these technologies, and we argue that they can implement liquidated damages without courts. We address the hurdles courts may impose to use of smart contracts on blockchain and show that sophisticated parties' ex ante commitment to them may lead courts to allow their use as pre-commitment devices.

In the first part of the 20th century, a group of law scholars offered engaging, and occasionally disconcerting, views on the role of judges and the relationship between law and politics in the United States. These legal realists borrowed methods from the social sciences to carefully study the law as experienced by lawyers, judges, and average citizens and promoted a progressive vision for American law and society. Legal realism investigated the nature of legal reasoning, the purpose of law, and the role of judges. The movement asked questions which reshaped the study of jurisprudence and continue to drive lively debates about the law and politics in classrooms, courtrooms, and even the halls of Congress. This thorough analysis provides an introduction to the ideas, context, and leading personalities of legal realism. It helps situate an important movement in legal theory in the context of American politics and political thought and will be of great interest to students of judicial politics, American constitutional development, and political theory.

An important chapter in the rediscovery of Aristotle in the Middle Ages is the oeuvre of Bartholomew of Messina (Bartholomaeus de Messana), a translator at the court of Manfred, King of Sicily (1258 1266). However, the impact of both Bartholomew and Manfred on the cultural and intellectual life of their time remains understudied, especially in comparison to the attention received by the translator's contemporary, William of Moerbeke, and by the king's father, Frederick II of Hohenstaufen. The authors of Translating at the Court address the nature and importance of Bartholomew's oeuvre (and especially his translations of Aristotle), situate Bartholomew's activity in a broader context, and pay special attention to cultural life under the reign of Manfred.

Contributors: Pieter Beullens (KU Leuven), Charles Burnett (Warburg Institute, London), Valerie Cordonier (CNRS KU Leuven), Pieter De Leemans (KU Leuven), Fulvio Delle Donne (Universita della Basilicata), Elisabeth Deviere (KU Leuven), Michael Dunne (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), Dimitri Gutas (Yale University), Kotzia Paraskevi (Aristotle University, Thessaloniki), Alessandra Perriccioli Saggese (Seconda Universita di Napoli), Giacinta Spinosa (Universita di Cassino), Gudrun Vuillemin-Diem (Thomas-Institut, Koln), Steven J. Williams (New Mexico Highlands University), Mauro Zonta (Sapienza Universita di Roma)"

The Supreme Court is one of the most traditional institutions in America that has been an exclusively male domain for almost two hundred years. From 1981 to 2010, four women were appointed to the Supreme Court for the first time in U.S. history. The Rhetoric of Supreme Court Women: From Obstacles to Options, by Nichola D. Gutgold, analyzes the rhetoric of the first four women elected to the Supreme Court: Sandra Day O, Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Gutgold, s thorough exploration of these pioneering women, s rhetorical strategies includes confirmation hearings, primary scripts of their written opinions, invited public lectures, speeches, and personal interviews with Justices O, Connor, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor. These illuminating documents and interviews form rhetorical biographies of the first four women of the Supreme Court, shedding new light on the rise of political women in the American judiciary and the efficacy of their rhetoric in a historically male-dominated political system. Gutgold, s The Rhetoric of Supreme Court Women provides valuable insight into political communication and the changing gender zeitgeist in American poli

The Court's decisions are interpreted and disseminated via the media. During this process, the media paints an image of the Court and its business. Like any artist, the media has license regarding what to cover and the amount of attention devoted to any aspect of the Court and its business. Some cases receive tremendous attention, while others languish on the back pages or are ignored. These selection effects create a skewed picture of the Court and its work, and might affect public attitudes toward the Court. Indeed, studies of media coverage of other governmental institutions reveal that when, and how, their policy decisions are covered has implications for the public's understanding of, compliance with, support for, and cynicism about the policy. This book uncovers and describes this coverage and compares it to the confirmation hearings, the Court's actual work, even its members. Rorie Spill Solberg and Eric N. Waltenburg analyze media coverage of nominations and confirmation hearings, the justices' "extra-curricular" activities and their retirements/deaths, and the Court's opinions, and compare this coverage to analyses of confirmation transcripts and the Court's full docket. Solberg and Waltenburg contend that media now cover the Court and its personnel more similarly to its coverage of other political institutions. Journalists still regurgitate a mythology supported by the justices, a "cult of the robe," wherein unbiased and apolitical judges mechanically base their decisions upon the law and the Constitution. Furthermore, they argue the media also focus on the "cult of personality," wherein the media emphasize certain attributes of the justices and their work to match the public's preferences for subject matter and content. The media's portrayal, then, may undercut the Court's legitimacy and its reservoir of good will.

This book is an unconventional reappraisal of Soviet law: a field that is ripe for re-evaluation, now that it is clear of Cold War cobwebs and, as this book shows, and that appears surprisingly topical and newly compelling. Drawing on a wide range of sources - including Russian-language Soviet statues and regulations, jurisprudence and legal theory, English-language 'legal Kremlinology, ' and works of general legal, political, social, and economic theory - this book analyses the central significance of law in the design and operation of Soviet economic, political, and social institutions. In short, Scott Newton argues here that the Soviet order was a work of law. And, in arguing that it was an exemplary, rather than aberrant, case of the uses to which law was put in twentieth century industrialised societies, this book provides an insightful account, not only of the significance of modern law to the Soviet case, but of significance of the Soviet case for modern law

- Clear and concise explanation of key principles, this is an ideal text for anyone taking the SQE1. - Includes practice questions in the text, and multiple choice questions online - together, the book will allow SQE candidates to practice the skills needed to pass the SQE exam. - One of a wider series of SQE1 textbooks.

The term judicial opinion can be a misnomer as rarely are judges' true feelings on legal issues and the work they do made available to the public. Judges are constrained when writing decisions to follow the law and leave personal commentary aside. Through a series of revealing interviews, this book gathers empirical data from judges and justices from different legal systems to provide a scintillating look at how they view their jobs and cope with difficult legal matters. Interviews are conducted according to strict guidelines with a standardized format for consistency. Each chapter begins by describing the region and its style of judicial governance. This is followed by an interview with a judge or justice in the particular jurisdiction. They discuss their careers, personal judicial philosophies, the problems and successes they've experienced, and how theory influences practice in their jurisdiction. Many also discuss transnational relations and several chapters include glossaries that explain unfamiliar terms and acronyms. Each chapter concludes with the interviewer's assessment and observations. This structure allows readers to easily compare the views of judges and to see the similarities, the differences, and the uniqueness of the different legal models and systems. Trends in the Judiciary: Interviews with Judges Across the Globe, Volume Two is the seventh publication in the Interviews with Global Leaders in Policing, Courts, and Prisons series. The broad-based coverage of varying viewpoints in this text encourages a great breadth of understanding of global justice.