View the Table of Contents.
Read the Foreword.

"This thoughtful book will appeal to readers across the political spectrum."
--"Harvard Law Review"

"An invaluable source . . . for anyone interested in navigating the judiciary's politics."
--"National Journal"

"The Myth of the Imperial Judiciary makes a formidable argument that conservatives indeed have an unrealistic conception of the Supreme Court."
--"Austin American Statesman"

"Kozlowski marshals history to show that not only was a strong and active judiciary intended by the Founding Fathers, but also that it has served the nation extremely well."
--"Chicago Sun-Times"

"Kozlowski effectively demonstrates that courts have far less power to operate as free agents than many believe."
--"Law and Politics Book Review"

"Kozlowski marshals history to show that not only was a strong and active judiciary intended by the Founding Fathers, it has served the nation extremely well. . . . A fine piece of scholarship."
--"Washington Post"

"How many minds his book will change on a subject so charged with emotion remainds dubious, but the points Mr. Kozlowski makes so expertly cannot in fairness be ignored."
--"New York Law Journal"

Few institutions have become as ferociously fought over in democratic politics as the courts. While political criticism of judges in this country goes back to its inception, today's intensely ideological assault is nearly unprecedented.

Spend any amount of time among the writings of contemporary right-wing critics of judicial power, and you are virtually assured of seeing repeated complaints about the "imperial judiciary." American conservatives contend not onlythat judicial power has expanded dangerously in recent decades, but that liberal judges now willfully write their policy preferences into law. They raise alarms that American courts possess a degree of power incompatible with the functioning of a democratic polity.

The Myth of the Imperial Judiciary explores the anti-judicial ideological trend of the American right, refuting these claims and taking a realistic look at the role of courts in our democracy to show that conservatives have a highly "unrealistic" conception of their power. Kozlowski first assesses the validity of the conservative view of the Founders' intent, arguing that courts have played an assertive role in our politics since their establishment. He then considers contemporary judicial powers to show that conservatives have greatly overstated the extent to which the expansion of rights which has occurred has worked solely to the benefit of liberals.

Kozlowski reveals the ways in which the claims of those on the right are often either unsupported or simply wrong. He concludes that American courts, far from imperiling our democracy or our moral fabric, stand as a bulwark against the abuse of legislative power, acting forcefully, as they have always done, to give meaning to constitutional promises.

Written for social scientists who study the judiciary, legal scholars, judges, and others who are interested in the workings of the federal courts, this volume offers a comprehensive examination of the role of U.S. magistrates--the relatively invisible subordinate judicial officers within the federal district courts. The study is unique in its use of an observation methodology: the author was able to study U.S. magistrates during all of their daily activities and observe their interactions with other actors in the federal judiciary. Particularly valuable are its insights into such functions as pretrial conferences, meetings with litigants, and other situations normally beyond the purview of scholars and the public. The author focuses throughout on both the development of the magistrates' varied roles and their consequences for the federal judicial system.

After examining magistrates' roles within several representative courts in detail, the author analyzes the factors which influence the development of these diverse roles and identifies the specific effects--both planned and unplanned--that the subordinate judicial officers have upon the court system. Smith refutes a commonly held view that district judges control the definition of magistrates' roles and concludes that in some cases, especially with regard to the coercion of litigants, the magistrate systeM's effects cannot be seen to be completely beneficial. In addition, the book contains an in-depth study of the appointment process for magistrates complete with a case history of the merit selection committee process. The author documents the influence of district judges over the merit selection process, adding concrete support to scholarly arguments about the inherently political nature of judicial selection.

Koshner explores the increase in interest group participation before the U.S. Supreme Court. Since 1953, when less than 13 percent of the Court's full opinion cases were accompanied by friend of the court briefs, there has been a steady increase in interest group litigation. By the 1993 term, interest groups participated in 92 percent of the cases brought before the Supreme Court. While asking whether the rise in interest group activity in this supposedly independent arena should concern us, Koshner attempts to solve the fascinating political puzzle of this tremendous growth. He begins with the growth of interest group participation and asks, quite simply, why? In answering this question, Koshner draws on a series of studies that focus primarily on individual groups and their litigation decisions. He then uses them to explore the macro-level trends that pervade the relationship between the Supreme Court and interest groups. In particular, Koshner studies the roles of four important groups: the Court, Congress, the executive branch, and the interest groups themselves. Within each, he finds a series of changes or shifts in policy that begins to answer the puzzle, and examines his conclusions within the context of First Amendment church-state cases. Students, scholars, and other researchers dealing with contemporary public law issues will find this work of particular value.

An in-depth examination of the U.S. Supreme Court under the 11-year reign of Chief Justice Edward Douglass White. The White Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy examines the workings and legacies of the Supreme Court during the tenure of Chief Justice Edward Douglass White. Through detailed discussions of landmark cases, this reference work explores the role the Court played in steering the country through an era of economic growth, racial discrimination, and international warfare. The White Court reveals how the Court established its greatest legacy, the "rule of reason," in antitrust cases against the American Tobacco Company and Standard Oil, and how it resolved controversies concerning the expansion of executive power during wartime. Individual profiles of the 13 White Court justices describe their rise to prominence and controversies surrounding their nominations, their work on the Court, judicial philosophies, important decisions, and overall impact. A-Z entries on key people, laws, cases, events, and concepts such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, and Standard Oil of New Jersey v. United States Appendix with excerpts from primary documents of key cases decided during the White Court tenure

To understand today's Supreme Court, it is essential to understand the judicial philosophy of its swing vote. For twenty years, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has voted with the majority more than any of his colleagues. He has provided the deciding vote in cases involving politically charged issues such as affirmative action, the 2000 presidential election, religious expression, gay rights, and executive power to detain suspected terrorists. With a record reliably neither liberal nor conservative, Kennedy has generally been viewed as a capricious, indecisive moderate.

Frank Colucci, however, argues that Kennedy indeed displays a coherent approach to constitutional interpretation. Colucci digs deep into the Justice's record, offering a close analysis of not only of Kennedy's opinions on the Court but also his prior opinions on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, his off-the-bench speeches delivered before becoming a Justice, and his testimony at confirmation hearings. Colucci identifies Kennedy's core belief: that judges have a duty to ensure the word liberty in the Constitution be given its full and necessary meaning.

Colucci shows that Kennedy rejects theories of originalism and judicial restraint. Instead, Kennedy adopts a moral reading of the Constitution--similar to that championed by Ronald Dworkin and Randy Barnett as well as former Justice William J. Brennan--in which liberty and human dignity trump even democracy.

Depicting Kennedy as seeking an alternative to the perceived excesses of both the Warren Court and originalist overreaction, Colucci also compares Kennedy's rhetoric to Catholic teaching and shows him as struggling to disassociate his personal beliefs from his official duties. Separate chapters offer close readings of Kennedy's jurisprudence regarding abortion, free speech, equality, and government structure.

Colucci's persuasive account offers readers a more nuanced understanding of Justice Kennedy's arguments about the nature of personal liberty and the proper role of courts in defining and enforcing it.

A valuable analysis of the political environment, judicial records, and implications of rulings during the era of the Burger Court. The Burger Court delivered significant decisions in cases involving the separation of powers, equal protection, free speech, and civil liberties. The Burger Court guaranteed in Roe v. Wade a woman's right to an abortion, demonstrating that this court definitely had a mind of its own. This handbook is as suitable for the preparation of term papers and debates as it is for ready reference and more involved research. Includes extensive reference materials such as further reading and bibliographical sections directing users to primary sources and Court documents Covers key people such as Archibald Cox and Gerald Ford, laws such as the Equal Rights Amendment and the Voting Rights Act, and events such as the Iranian Hostage Crisis and the Watergate Scandal

This is the first in-depth analysis of the Rehnquist Court viewed as a functional entity. Well known for his work in constitutional law, Stanley Friedelbaum analyzes leading cases and rigorously examines the Court's full opinions. He reviews the interaction between the Justices and points to the patterns of the Court as a new centralist coalition comes to control critical policymaking relating to abortion, the right to die, affirmative action, reverse discrimination, and privacy interests. A table of important cases and a bibliography enhance this short study for general readers and for students in introductory constitutional law courses and in advanced courses in judicial politics and American government.

This volume of essays celebrates the first 50 years in the life of the New Zealand Court of Appeal. The move, in 1958, to a Court of Appeal comprising permanent appellate judges was an important landmark in the development of New Zealand law. The chapters highlight areas where the Court of Appeal has made a significant contribution to New Zealand and wider Commonwealth law, showing how the Court's jurisprudence has both reflected and contributed to resolving some of the pressing issues of the times.They are a critical reflection on the changing work and achievements of the permanent Court over the past half-century. In addition to recording the perspectives of a former President on the Court's achievements, the essays in this volume deal with such varied topics as: the role and use of precedent by the Court of Appeal; the Court's contribution to Commonwealth administrative law; criminal appeals; relationship property; accident compensation and tort litigation; company law; equity in commercial dealings; and the rights of Maori, the indigenous people of New Zealand.

On the occasion of its tenth anniversary, the EFTA Court held a conference at which speakers were asked to reflect on the case law of the Court and its role in the European Economic Area (EEA). In the course of its work, the Court has acted as a driving force of integration under the EEA Agreement, by establishing general principles such as state liability and giving landmark judgments in several areas of European law. The essays in this volume, by leading experts and high-ranking representatives of national and European courts, cover areas such as the relationship between the principle of free movement and national or collective preferences on the EU/EEA and WTO levels, the relationship between the European courts and the Member States in European integration, homogeneity as a general principle of European integration, and the importance of judicial dialogue. In this regard, the sentence from President Skouris of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, who called the dialogue between the EFTA Court and the EC Court 'a shining example of judicial cooperation', could also serve as a motto for the present book.

He reviled the rich for their cupidity and they found his rhetoric repulsive. Plebians believed him their champion and patricians knew he was their bete noire, remarks Halford Ryan in his eloquent foreword to this definitive survey of Clarence DarroW's development as orator and unique American myth. As a writer, lecturer, debater, and trial lawyer Darrow spoke for the have-nots and cultivated an image of mythic proportions as the underdog's advocate. Many of the more than 2,000 trials in which he was active reflected the major social and philosophical issues of the last quarter of the nineteenth and first third of the twentieth centuries in America. Read today, DarroW's speeches still ring true both as political statements and as models of persuasive pleading and pathos--reason enough to study the work of this uncommon advocate who stood perpetually opposed to the great and powerful of the earth. Richard J. Jensen has written a clearsighted volume that documents how Darrow created and then enlarged his personal myth through speeches, writings, and actions. Each chapter focuses on particular segments of that creation. Half of the book consists of authoritative texts of several of DarroW's most influential and rhetorically brilliant speeches, and a speech chronology simplifies the work of researchers.

The study opens with a brief biography, an overview of DarroW's rhetoric, along with the forces that affected it, and some initial comments on the elements that make up the myth. The next chapter, Schoolmaster of the Courtroom, chronicles the origins of DarroW's image as a defender of the downtrodden and his early trials in defense of labor unions and their leaders. What is considered to be one of the most famous speeches in American legal history, that given by Darrow at the conclusion of the 1924 Leopold and Loeb trial, is the focus of Chapter Three. Chapter Four centers on the Scopes Trial, perhaps the most famous trial in recent American history, during which the dramatic confrontation with William Jennings Bryan occurred. The penultimate chapter explains the arguments Darrow used to defend the poor, radicals, Blacks, and other less fortunate members of society. Finally, DarroW's rhetoric as a writer and as an active speaker and debater on the lecture circuit is examined. Part II contains the authoritative texts of seven speeches including those given during the Leopold and Loeb Trial and the Scopes Trial, among others. The Chronology of Speeches, Bibliography, and Index close the volume. The speeches along with Jensen's intelligent, readable analysis and criticism will be an important resource for those teaching and studying Legal Rhetoric and the History of Public Address.

There are more than 600 Federal district judges serving today, and they decide some 230,000 civil cases each year. About 90% of the decisions they reach are final. Lyles argues that these lower court judges not only influence the flow of information to the judicial hierarchy, but they formulate questions that influence how higher courts, including the Supreme Court, respond. As such they are key elements in the formulation and implementation of public policy. To cite a few examples, they desegregate school districts, run mental institutions and prisons, break up monopolies, and reapportion legislatures. Lyles begins by examining the structure and function of federal courts and detailing the history, operation, and purpose of the district courts. He then turns to the selection, nomination, and appointment of district judges. Lyles then analyzes the extent to which presidents might advance policy objectives through their judicial appointments to the district courts. After examining how African-American, Latino, and white judges, male and female, view their roles as policy actors, Lyles concludes with a discussion of the implications of the study. Important for students and scholars of contemporary public policy and the court system.

Asked if the country was governed by a republic or a monarchy, Benjamin Franklin replied, "A republic, if you can keep it." Since its founding, Americans have worked hard to nurture and protect their hard-won democracy. And yet few consider the role of constitutional law in America's survival. In Unfit for Democracy, Stephen Gottlieb argues that constitutional law without a focus on the future of democratic government is incoherent-illogical and contradictory. Approaching the decisions of the Roberts Court from political science, historical, comparative, and legal perspectives, Gottlieb highlights the dangers the court presents by neglecting to interpret the law with an eye towards preserving democracy. A senior scholar of constitutional law, Gottlieb brings a pioneering will to his theoretical and comparative criticism of the Roberts Court. The Roberts Court decisions are not examined in a vacuum but instead viewed in light of constitutional politics in India, South Africa, emerging Eastern European nations, and others. While constitutional decisions abroad have contributed to both the breakdown and strengthening of democratic politics, decisions in the Roberts Court have aggravated the potential destabilizing factors in democratic governments. Ultimately, Unfit for Democracy calls for an interpretation of the Constitution that takes the future of democracy seriously. Gottlieb warns that the Roberts Court's decisions have hurt ordinary Americans economically, politically, and in the criminal process. They have damaged the historic American melting pot, increased the risk of anti-democratic paramilitaries, and clouded the democratic future.

The twelve case studies in Chinese Law: Knowledge, Practice and Transformation, 1530s to 1950s, edited by Li Chen and Madeleine Zelin, open a new window onto the historical foundation and transformation of Chinese law and legal culture in late imperial and modern China. Their interdisciplinary analyses provide valuable insights into the multiple roles of law and legal knowledge in structuring social relations, property rights, popular culture, imperial governance, and ideas of modernity; they also provide insight into the roles of law and legal knowledge in giving form to an emerging revolutionary ideology and to policies that continue to affect China to the present day.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has often been characterised both as a motor of integration and a judicial law-maker. To what extent is this a fair description of the Court's jurisprudence over more than half a century? The book is divided into two parts. Part one develops a new heuristic theory of legal reasoning which argues that legal uncertainty is a pervasive and inescapable feature of primary legal material and judicial reasoning alike, which has its origin in a combination of linguistic vagueness, value pluralism and rule instability associated with precedent. Part two examines the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU against this theoretical framework. The author demonstrates that the ECJ's interpretative reasoning is best understood in terms of a tripartite approach whereby the Court justifies its decisions in terms of the cumulative weight of purposive, systemic and literal arguments. That approach is more in line with orthodox legal reasoning in other legal systems than is commonly acknowledged and differs from the approach of other higher, especially constitutional courts, more in degree than in kind. It nevertheless leaves the Court considerable discretion in determining the relative weight and ranking of the various interpretative criteria from one case to another. The Court's exercise of its discretion is best understood in terms of the constraints imposed by the accepted justificatory discourse and certain extra-legal steadying factors of legal reasoning, which include a range of political factors such as sensitivity to Member States' interests, political fashion and deference to the 'EU legislator'. In conclusion, the Court of Justice of the EU has used the flexibility inherent in its interpretative approach and the choice it usually enjoys in determining the relative weight and order of the interpretative criteria at its disposal, to resolve legal uncertainty in the EU primary legal materials in a broadly communautaire fashion subject, however, to i) regard to the political, constitutional and budgetary sensitivities of Member States, ii) depending on the constraints and extent of interpretative manoeuvre afforded by the degree of linguistic vagueness of the provisions in question, the relative status of and degree of potential conflict between the applicable norms, and the range and clarity of the interpretative topoi available to resolve first-order legal uncertainty, and, finally, iii) bearing in mind the largely unpredictable personal element in all adjudication. Only in exceptional cases which the Court perceives to go to the heart of the integration process and threaten its acquis communautaire, is the Court of Justice likely not to feel constrained by either the wording of the norms in issue or by the ordinary conventions of interpretative argumentation, and to adopt a strongly communautaire position, if need be in disregard of what the written laws says but subject to the proviso that the Court is assured of the express or tacit approval or acquiescence of national governments and courts.

Since the first edition of this popular text was published in 1984, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has transformed the role of the courts in Canadian politics. Newly revised and updated, Law, Politics, and the Judicial Process in Canada, 4th Edition provides an introduction to the issues raised by the changing political role of Canadian judges. It includes over 40 new readings, including two all-new chapters on the Harper Conservatives and Aboriginal Law. Addressing current controversies, including the Canadian Judicial Council's investigations into Justice Robin Camp and Lori Douglas and the Trudeau Government's re-introduction of the Court Challenges Program, this book strives for competing perspectives, with many readings juxtaposed to foster debate. Taking a critical approach to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the growth of judicial power, editors F.L. Morton and Dave Snow provide an even-handed examination of current and ongoing issues. Law, Politics, and the Judicial Process in Canada, 4th Edition is the leading source for students interested in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the growth of judicial power in Canada.

This book provides a highly accessible yet practical guide to all aspects of arbitration, from the drafting of an arbitration agreement through to the award, including enforcement and appeals. Being comprehensive in its approach, every stage of the arbitral process under the Arbitration Act 1996 is covered including a separate chapter covering special types of arbitration such as consumer schemes and arbitrations under statute. Written in simple non-legalistic language and intentionally general in its coverage, it should be of relevance to arbitration matters whatever trade or profession practised.

This book highlights the tremendous shift in the traditional arrangements for the delivery of civil justice in the Commonwealth Caribbean, from litigation to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes. Over the last quarter of a century, much learning has taken place on the topic of ADR and the literature on the subject is now voluminous. This book puts forward the thesis that the peculiar experiences of the developing world ought to help reshape our traditional notions of ADR. Furthermore, the impact of globalisation on the developing world has brought with it special and peculiar challenges to our notions of civil and criminal justice which are not replicated elsewhere. This book will appeal to a wide readership. The legal profession, students of law and politics, social scientists, mediators, the police, state officers and the public at large will find its contents of interest.

An introduction to the complexities of law, with clarity Elliott & Quinn's English Legal System by Allbon and Kaur Dua has been relied upon by generations of students as an explanation of the English legal system and how it works in practice, being renowned for its wide-ranging coverage and signature writing style. This text includes a variety of features to support your study, for example: - topical debates to engage you in the discussion points and reforms of today - relating the law, processes and procedure to our everyday lives - a clear structure designed to aid systematic understanding of broad topics - putting the law in context through the Bigger Picture - key cases described and analysed in depth within a text box - a glossary to explain complex concepts Updated annually with all major case law and legislative developments, this 21st Edition includes coverage of: Debate of recent cases such as Miller in relation to constitutional law and Brexit Uber and Deliveroo 'gig' economy cases on employee status Modernisation of the administration of civil justice system Owens v Owens divorce case and resulting Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill enabling no-fault divorce recent recommendations regarding the promotion of ADR Review of LASPO by MOJ and implications for criminal justice English Legal System is the ideal companion for anyone studying law at university. An enhanced ebook of this title is available with multiple choice questions, apply the law and . Emily Allbon is a Senior Lecturer and the Director of Mooting at City, University of London. Sanmeet Kaur Dua is a Senior Lecturer in Law and the Deputy Director for TEF at Queen Mary University of London. Pearson, the world's learning company.

The pleading and proof of foreign law are often treated as matters of peripheral importance. But, in reality, how foreign law is established, and whether it must be established at all, are central issues in private international law. Whether litigants are free to ignore the foreign elements in a dispute goes to the heart of the conflicts process, and without effective means to establish foreign law the very purpose of that process is subverted. Such issues give rise to particular problems in English law. It is often unclear whether the rules for choice of law are mandatory, and whether the application of foreign law is therefore required. The cost and uncertainty of establishing foreign law may also affect how cases are argued and decided, and may discourage litigants from suing at all. This book, the first to examine the topic from the perspective of English law, offers a radical reappraisal of a long-neglected subject. Fentiman argues that the law is both more complex, and more defensible, than had previously been supposed. He provides a practical guide to the subject and in so doing presents the conflict of laws in a way which is both novel and illuminating.

The essays in this volume reflect the wider concept of legal history - how legal processes fitted into the social and political life of the community, and how courts and other legal processes were used by contemporaries - rather than the more traditional but narrower study of internal procedural development interpretation. In doing so, they both aim to justify the study of legal history in its own right and to show how legal records, including those of a variety of central and local courts can be used to further the understanding of a range of social, commercial, popular and political history.

The way that small claims are dealt with has prompted enormous interest in many jurisdictions, yet the subject has been neglected by researchers in this country. We should not doubt the importance of these procedures, however. It is increasingly seen as a convenient expedient in tackling the crisis in civil justice, and with a massive increase in the small claims limit from GBP1,000 to GBP3,000 in January 1996, small claims have suddenly become big judicial business. This book (based on research conducted over a two-year period and funded by the Lord Chancellor's Department, the Office of Fair Trading and the Economic and Social Research Council) presents the most extensive empirical research analysis of small claims procedures ever undertaken in this country. The theoretical and practical implications of moves to expand the scope of 'Do-it-yourself' justice are explored. The author had privileged access to the district court judges who conduct claim hearings, and the book is the first to include lengthy extracts from tape recorded interviews with them. It also includes discussion of interviews with litigants, including many who struggled to gain payment of court judgments.

This book focuses on the most important implications of the "fair hearing" right for conducting civil proceedings. It provides a thorough and critical analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (the Strasbourg Court) regarding Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It puts forward a generally applicable framework for the analysis of the various procedural issues to which the "fair hearing" right may give rise, then applies that framework to discuss a selection of specific procedural issues. The book investigates several important questions of general scope in the context of ECHR Article 6, such as: What is the relevance of case law regarding criminal proceedings when the "fair hearing" right is applied to civil proceedings? How does the Strasbourg Court actually proceed when evaluating whether specific court proceedings have been "fair"? What are the roles of fundamental concepts such as the "margin of appreciation" and proportionality in this regard? In the subsequent discussion of specific procedural issues, the focus is on the balance that must be struck between procedural safeguards and the objectives of efficiency and economy. The book considers specific procedural issues such as: When must an oral hearing be held in order for civil proceedings to be "fair"? When will a refusal of specific evidence render civil proceedings unfair? When is a civil litigant entitled to le gal aid? As such, the book not only presents current case law; it also compares various strands of the case law regarding the "fair hearing" right, and argues that the Strasbourg Court's approach to various pertinent issues needs to become more consistent. Offering an in-depth examination of the Strasbourg Court's case law regarding ECHR Article 6, this book should be consulted by anyone interested in fundamental fair trial rights.