This book is a collection of papers that address a fundamental question: What is the role of civil justice and civil procedure in the various national traditions in the contemporary world? The book presents striking differences among a range of countries and legal traditions, but also points to common trends and open issues. It brings together prominent experts, professionals and scholars from both civil and common law jurisdictions. It represents all main legal traditions ranging from Europe (Germanic and Romanic countries, Scandinavia, ex-Socialist countries) and Russia to the Americas (North and South) and China (Mainland and Hong Kong). While addressing the main issue the goals of civil justice the book discusses the most topical concerns regarding the functioning and efficiency of national systems of civil justice. These include concerns such as finding the appropriate balance between accurate fact-finding and the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, the processing of hard cases and the function of civil justice as a specific public service. In the mosaic of contrasts and oppositions special place is devoted to the continuing battle between the individualistic/liberal approach and the collectivist/paternalistic approach the battle in which, seemingly, paternalistic tendencies regain momentum in a number of contemporary justice systems."

Dalton combines the scholarly literature on public law and judicial impact with recent studies of policy implementation at the state level. He emphasizes the underlying constitutional, organizational, psychological, and political factors that shape public policy outcomes, arguing that a sound grasp of these factors can lead to an understanding of the gap between theory and practice in democratic politics. He examines the historical development and revision of the U.S. Supreme Court civil liberties rulings from the 1960s to the early 1980s as well as executive and congressional policy to regulate criminal records privacy. He also underscores the importance of the intergovernmental context in which state officials act as both leaders and intermediaries in the implementation of national policies. Dalton then combines these elements of analysis into a general theory of legitimation in order to render the significance of criminal justice policy for the American political system understandable as a whole.

Philips looks at the languages of judges in the courtroom to show that, while judges see themselves as impartial agents of the constitutional right to due process, there is actually much diversity in the way that judges interract with defendants due to their interpretations of the law, their attitudes toward courtroom control, and their own political-ideological stances regarding due process. She uses courtroom transcripts, interviews, and the written law itself to show how ideological diversity is organized in legal discourse.

Patricia Rosier died at her home in Fort Myers, Florida, in January of 1986, having sought the help of her prominent physician husband, Peter, to end her cancer-ravaged life with some measure of dignity. By November 1987, Peter had been indicted for first degree murder and faced death in Florida's electric chair. How could it happen? How does a loving husband and father get charged with first degree murder? This compelling true story shows just how easy it is in America's legal system. "Euthanasia" remains a crime in Florida and in most other states, yet the majority of such "criminals" are never prosecuted. But Dr. Rosier was singled out because he "confessed", both in a television interview and in writing, to believing in euthanasia and to assisting his wife's suicide. In Murder of Mercy every heart-pounding moment of Dr. Rosier's legal ordeal is vividly captured by famed trial attorney Stanley M. Rosenblatt, who, together with his wife and law partner, Susan, represented the accused. Describing an intriguing array of legal twists and turns, this riveting book is more than just gripping courtroom drama. Find out why Patricia's father and brothers sought immunity before they would testify. Feel the rush, the exhilaration, of planning defense strategy: How could anyone explain away Dr. Rosier's confessions? Could the Fort Myers judge be persuaded to change the location of the trial? Should Peter Rosier testify in his own defense? The powerful arguments of the State and the defense are laced with ridicule, sarcasm, and scorn: each side accusing the other of treacherous character assassination. Rosenblatt's penetrating assessment of judges, the use of expert witnesses, the exclusion ofrelevant evidence, attorney-client privilege, and the granting of immunity serve as the foundation for a searing critique of America's criminal justice system and the society it is designed to protect.

The Law Officer's Pocket Manual is a handy, pocket-sized, spiral-bound manual that highlights basic legal rules for quick reference and offers examples showing how those rules are applied. The manual provides concise guidance based on U.S. Supreme Court rulings on constitutional law issues and other legal developments, covering arrest, search, surveillance, and other routine as well as sensitive areas of law enforcement. It includes more than 100 examples drawn from leading cases to provide guidance on how to act in a wide variety of situations. The 2023 edition is completely updated to reflect recent court decisions. This book helps you keep track of everything in a readable and easy-to-carry format. Routledge offers tiered discounts on bulk orders of 5 or more copies: For more information, please visit: https://www.routledge.com/collections/16268

Is the American judiciary still the least dangerous branch, as Alexander Hamilton and legal scholar Alexander Bickel characterized it? Unlike legislatures or administrative agencies, courts do not make policy so much as direct and redirect policy as it is implemented. The judicial contribution to policymaking involves the infusion of constitutional rights into the realm of public policy, and as the government has grown, the courts have become more powerful from doing more and more of this. Powers and Rothman explore the impact of the federal courts, providing a brief account of the development of constitutional law and an overview of the judiciary's impact in six controversial areas of public policy.

Busing

Affirmative action

Prison reform

Mental health reform

Procedural reforms in law enforcement

Electoral redistricting

In each of these areas, the authors review significant cases that bear on the particular policy, exploring the social science evidence to assess the impact of the courts on policies--and the consequences of that intervention. Powers and Rothman conclude that judicial intervention in public policy has often brought about undesirable consequences, sometimes even for the intended beneficiaries of government intervention.

This special issue of Studies in Law, Politics and Society focuses on law and the liberal state; presenting an interdisciplinary and multifaceted approach to analysis of law and liberty. The first chapters focus on law's direct relationship with the American liberal state. John P. Anderson defends John Rawl's pragmatism; Adelaide Villmoare and Peter Stillman consider the 'Janus faces of law', a double vision of law where both sides of the face adhere to one another through neoliberalism; and Timothy Delaune examines jury nullification. The remaining chapters then go on to consider specific applications of the law within society. Susan Burgess provides a critical account of what implications the inclusion of gays in the US military has for understanding the means by which the liberal state uses law to include the previously excluded. Daniel Skinner then problematizes the body politics of American liberalism, as viewed through the lens of health policy and the final chapter from Beau Breslin and Katherine Cavanaugh explores how various legal and judicial policies have highlighted the clash between the state's imperial authority and Native American narratives.

Robert G Ingersoll (1833-1899) was a complex figure - a brilliant lawyer and orator who courageously advanced the concept of free-thought; a magnetic extrovert whose public esteem, eagerly sought, never earned him the private favours he so generously bestowed on others. Ingersoll was a staunch republican in the great tradition of Abraham Lincoln, and he vigorously championed such progressive causes as equal rights for blacks, women, and children; liberal divorce laws; and better wages and conditions for workers. Perhaps Ingersoll's greatest legacy derives from his daring rejection of religious superstition (during an era which saw a tremendous revival of spiritualism and religious fundamentalism) and his ardent belief in humanity.Ingersoll is considered one of the most prominent figures of the 19th century. From about 1880 to his death in 1899, he probably spoke to more Americans in person than anyone before or since; he had daily audiences of as many as three thousand people while he was on tour, several months a year for many years. Despite this, Ingersoll's career has not yet received the attention it clearly merits. In this comprehensive work, Frank Smith explores the life and thought of this charismatic figure, using newspaper accounts of the time and extensive quotations from Ingersoll's correspondence. Ingersoll's words provide a vivid portrait of 19th-century America from the stormy antebellum period to the beginnings of modern industrialism. His life reflects the great current of his age and speaks forcefully to the problems of our own.

Proposes groundbreaking, fundamental reform for the adversarial legal system to keep innocent people from going to prison We rely on the adversarial legal system to hold offenders accountable, ensure everyone is playing by the same rules, and keep our streets safe. Unfortunately, a grave condition lingers under the surface: at all times the imprisonment of possibly tens of thousands of innocent people. The Plea of Innocence offers a fundamental reform of the adversarial system: plausibly innocent people may now plead innocent and require the government to search for exonerating facts; in return, they will be required to waive their right to remain silent, speak to government agents, and participate in a search for truth. While almost all the participants within the system hope that only guilty people will be convicted, the unfortunate reality is that innocent people are convicted and imprisoned at an alarming rate. With the privatization of defense institutions, accused innocent people are themselves responsible for finding the facts that could exonerate them. Though the poor are represented by public defenders-in fact, almost no one who is charged with a crime has enough money to pay for a complete defense-it is still accused people, not public officials, who bear the entire burden of proving their innocence. Tim Bakken believes that reform of the three-hundred-year-old adversarial system is long overdue, and that the government should be responsible for searching for truth-exonerating facts for innocent people-rather than being satisfied with due process. While it is improbable that all the facts in any case will ever be known, the essential point is that the acquisition of facts will almost always benefit an innocent person who has been accused of a crime. Featuring compelling evidence and concrete steps for reform, The Plea of Innocence is at once sensible and revolutionary, a must-read for anyone invested in restoring truth to the justice system.

When the first President Bush chose David Hackett Souter for the Supreme Court in 1990, the slender New Englander with the shy demeanor and ambiguous past was quickly dubbed a "stealth candidate". Determined to avoid a repeat of the firestorm surrounding President Reagan's nomination of the controversial Robert Bork, Bush opted for Souter, who had, remarkably, produced only one law review article in his legal career. Souter, an obscure but well-respected New Hampshire conservative, seemed unlikely to arouse the kind of passionate opposition that defined the Bork confirmation process. And, indeed, Souter was accepted onto the Court with little fuss. Today, fifteen years into his tenure, Souter remains as enigmatic and unpredictable as ever, a mystery even to avid Court watchers. Who is David Hackett Souter and what will be his legacy on the Supreme Court? Sifting through Souter's opinions, papers of the Justice's contemporaries and other relevant records and interviews, esteemed Supreme Court biographer Tinsley Yarbrough here gives us the real David Souter, crafting a fascinating account of one of the heretofore most elusive Justices in the history of the Court. Though Souter's record on legal issues was generally conservative before his arrival on the Court, his mixed views caused some concern among both the left and the right during the appointment process. His reclusive lifestyle and frugality added to his mystique, making him even more difficult to peg. His penchant for solitude and his seemingly narrow circle of close friends convinced some that the middle-aged bachelor was out of touch with the sort of "real world" problems the nation's highest court regularly confronts. Court watchers soon realized-to their delight or dismay-that President Bush's "stealth" justice was a traditional New England Republican deeply tied to the party's historic roots in the union and civil rights-in stark contrast to most Reagan-Bush I appointees. On the bench, Souter has embraced a flexible, evolving, and highly pragmatic judicial style that embraces a high regard for precedent-even liberal decisions of the Warren and Burger Courts with which he may have personally disagreed. Even more significantly, Souter has become a regular and very effective critic of the set of rulings via which his ostensible political brethren-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas-have abandoned precedent to assert their conservative vision. Ultimately, Yarbrough contends, Souter has become the principal Rehnquist Court opponent of the originalist, text-bound jurisprudence that many of the more conservative Justices profess to champion.

In These Estimable Courts Damon Cann and Jeff Yates explore how citizens feel about the government institutions at the front lines of jurisprudential policy-making in America - our nation's state and local courts. The book's central focus concerns a primary question of governance - why do people support and find legitimate the institutions that govern their lives? Cann and Yates evaluate the factors that drive citizens' support for their state and local courts and that influence peoples' perceptions of the proper role of these courts in our society, as well as how judicial policy-making should be made. A viable democracy depends upon citizen belief in the legitimacy of government institutions. Nowhere is this more evident than in judicial institutions. Courts depend heavily on a reservoir of public good will and institutional legitimacy to get their decrees obeyed by the public and implemented by other policy actors. It enables courts to weather the storm of counter-majoritarian decisions and remain effective governing bodies whose edicts are respected and followed. These Estimable Courts takes advantage of new original survey data to evaluate citizens' beliefs about the legitimacy of state courts as well as a number of important related concerns. These include peoples' views concerning how judges decide cases, the role of judges and courts in policy-making, the manner in which we select judges, and finally, the dynamics of citizens' views regarding compliance with the law and legal institutions.

Based on the wish to reopen an international comparative discussion on fundamental notions of civil procedure, this book offers a number of insights into procedural human rights from different jurisdictions and different points of view.

This volume of Studies in Law, Politics, and Society brings together research by graduate students from universities in the United States and the United Kingdom. The work of these students was singled out by their teachers and advisors as showing unusual promise and marking out directions for the next generationA" of interdisciplinary legal scholars. The research collected here is often comparative. It is theoretically informed and rigorous in its methods. Taken together it shows breadth and excellence, and it signals the continuing vibrancy of interdisciplinary legal studies.

Immigration has been a controversial and contentious area of public policy since the Commonwealth Immigration Act ended most primary immigration in 1962. This study looks in detail at the work of practioners in the court-system that hears appeals from immigrants and asylum seekers against decisions made by the British Government. The book contains chapters about decision making in primary purpose and the asylum appeals, the administrative problems faced by successive British governments, and the perspectives of pressure groups and politicians. The British Immigration Courts transforms our understanding of immigration as a political issue through preserving a sense of routine work in the courts, civil service and political process which is ignored or idealised by other approaches. It is essential reading for practioners, academics and students interested in current debates about policy.

How are common interests protected in international dispute settlement? What is the role of different courts and tribunals? Why is the case law on common interests (in)consistent? Do we need more consistency for a better protection of common interests? Common Interests in International Litigation provides answers to questions that arise in international litigation as a result of an increasing recognition of common interests in this field and an ever-expanding network of specialised judicial bodies.Common Interests in International Litigation studies the case law of a number of international courts, focusing on international litigation concerning natural resource exploitation. This is a theme closely linked to a number of common interests, one which has been considered by a number of courts dealing with human rights, international security, international trade, international investment, the law of the sea, and more.This study aims to bring together the case law of these diverse judicial bodies to develop a common approach to common interests in international litigation. In contrast to previous studies that have focused on the approach to common or public interests in distinct legal regimes, this book offers an overview of the issue traversing traditional boundaries between legal regimes. It is therefore of particular interest to practitioners of international law and scholars specialising in the field seeking to broaden their horizons, and essential reading to all those interested in the enforcement of common interests at the international level.

International commercial arbitration and litigation are often seen as competing fora, fields of law, or markets. This intersection is at its highest at the forefront of any proceedings, at the jurisdictional stage. The analysis of jurisdictional issues at the forefront of an arbitration has been confined in a descriptive analysis of the law and jurisprudence, dealing with jurisdictional intersections almost in a mechanistic manner. These are not, however, issues which can be treated as mere mechanical rules. They are issues pertaining to core notions of authority, sovereignty, their origins and their allocation. At the same time, the pragmatic and practical domination of party autonomy is a fact which cannot be disregarded when one considers the normative and theoretical foundations of any model of dealing with these issues. This book moves beyond an analysis of arbitration and jurisdiction clauses to reconcile theory and practice, and provides an underlying theoretical model to explain and regulate jurisdictional intersections at the early stages of an arbitration from a private international law perspective. It combines both an in-depth engagement with the theoretical literature as well as a close examination and analysis of its practical consequences in the form of a restatement of the law of England and Wales. From a methodological perspective, it utilises contemporary theories in private international law to propose a coherent model of regulating arbitral jurisdictions which promotes autonomy and freedom of the parties at this stage. Demonstrating, first, how the theoretical model can be applied in practice and, second, to provide a basis for a potential future top-down or bottom-up approach of adopting the proposed model, it includes a succinct and practical codification of the current state of affairs in relation to the whole spectrum of jurisdictional issues in England and Wales to serve as a useful tool for practitioners considering jurisdictional issues both from the perspective of State courts and from the perspective of arbitral tribunals, as well as academics researching in these areas.

The only book of its kind, Introduction to South Pacific Law provides an overview of law in the South Pacific. It sets out the framework of South Pacific legal systems and also describes the substantive law on a broad range of topics.Examining both state laws and customary law, the book highlights common patterns and explains some of the principal differences between the laws and legal systems of the countries of the region.The introductory chapter looks at the development of South Pacific law and at South Pacific jurisprudence. Individual chapters are devoted to state laws, customary law, constitutional law, administrative law, criminal law, family law, contract law, torts law, land law, and court systems. The book makes extensive reference to legislative provisions and case law of individual jurisdictions.Including a discussion of recent changes in the law, this new edition of Introduction to South Pacific Law is a useful and up-to-date resource for all those interested in the law of the region.

The concept of learning to 'think like a lawyer' is one of the cornerstones of legal education in the United States and beyond. In this book, Jeffrey Lipshaw provides a critique of the traditional views of 'thinking like a lawyer' or 'pure lawyering' aimed at lawyers, law professors, and students who want to understand lawyering beyond the traditional warrior metaphor. Drawing on his extensive experience at the intersection of real world law and business issues, Professor Lipshaw presents a sophisticated philosophical argument that the "pure lawyering" of traditional legal education is agnostic to either truth or moral value of outcomes. He demonstrates pure lawyering's potential both for illusions of certainty and cynical instrumentalism, and the consequences of both when lawyers are called on as dealmakers, policymakers, and counsellors. This book offers an avenue for getting beyond (or unlearning) merely how to think like a lawyer. It combines legal theory, philosophy of knowledge, and doctrine with an appreciation of real-life judgment calls that multi-disciplinary lawyers are called upon to make. The book will be of great interest to scholars of legal education, legal language and reasoning as well as professors who teach both doctrine and thinking and writing skills in the first year law school curriculum; and for anyone who is interested in seeking a perspective on 'thinking like a lawyer' beyond the litigation arena.

Thoroughly revised and updated, this edition of the classic casebook on police ethics explores the moral complexities of situations faced by law enforcement officers every day across the United States. This updated edition of Power and Restraint maintains its place as a leading set of standards for evaluating police behavior. It extends our understanding of the basis of police accountability by grounding it in principles of the social contract and constitutional democracy. It applies the standards of fair access, public trust, public safety first, role discipline, and neutral professionalism to a variety of modern policing situations that help identify best practices and increase understanding of the challenges of policing in 21st-century America. Power and Restraint first locates itself in the context of other significant studies by scholars from various disciplines on moral issues in police work. Next, it establishes a foundation for moral evaluation of police work grounded in social contract theory as expressed in the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence. Third, the authors generate five standards derived from the social contract for judging the actions of police. In the second half of the book, the reader is asked to apply these standards to a variety of typical but morally ambiguous policing situations. Clarifies the basis for judgments of police behavior Features case studies of actual law enforcement situations with complex ethical considerations Improves police officers' ability to think about their actions by examining the principles of ethical policing and applying those principles to concrete cases Explains both the need for and limitations on police authority, including the use of force