The West's cherished dream of social harmony by numbers is today disrupting all our familiar legal frameworks - the state, democracy and law itself. Its scientistic vision shaped both Taylorism and Soviet Planning, and today, with 'globalisation', it is flourishing in the form of governance by numbers. Shunning the goal of governing by just laws, and empowered by the information and communication technologies, governance champions a new normative ideal of attaining measurable objectives. Programmes supplant legislation, and governance displaces government. However, management by objectives revives forms of law typical of economic vassalage. When a person is no longer protected by a law applying equally to all, the only solution is to pledge allegiance to someone stronger than oneself. Rule by law had already secured the principle of impersonal power, but in taking this principle to extremes, governance by numbers has paradoxically spawned a world ruled by ties of allegiance.

Governments must continuously update policies, laws, and legislation as the world continues to rapidly evolve due to technologies and changing cultural perspectives. To streamline policy creation and implementation, governments seek new and efficient methods to ensure their citizens' and communities' safety while also encouraging citizen participation. Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Government and Society provides research on emerging methodologies in effective governing including sections on public sector management and socioeconomic development. While highlighting the challenges facing government officials and law enforcement such as crisis response and natural disaster management, this book shows how technology use can make those areas of government more efficient and improve preventative measures. This book is an ideal resource for law enforcement, government officials and agencies, policymakers, public servants, citizen activists, researchers, and political leaders seeking cutting-edge information to strengthen their government's relationship with society and their constituents while also strengthening their policy measures through new technology and methods.

"The Lisbon Treaty states that national Parliaments shall contribute to a better functioning of the EU. Can they really do it and therefore enrich the European democracy? How far can they extend their original sovereignty without distorting political responsibilities that should be geared upon the European Parliament? The authors analyze the experience of the Italian Parliament under the light of these crucial questions and their exhaustive answers are greatly helpful to the readers of all over Europe." Giuliano Amato, Judge of the Italian Constitutional Court. This important new collection explores the role of the Italian Parliament in the Euro-national parliamentary system as an example of an increased role for national parliaments within the composite European constitutional order. It illustrates how parliamentary interactions within the European Union are highly systematic, with integrated procedures and mutual interdependence between the various institutions and stakeholders. The book argues that this dynamic is vital for both the functioning and the future equilibrium of democracy in the EU. This is significant, particularly given the challenges posed to democracy within the EU institutions and the Member States. Notwithstanding its peculiarities (a symmetrical bicameral system in which both Houses are directly elected, hold the same powers and are linked through a confidence relationship with the government), the Italian Parliament deserves specific attention as a lively active player of the European polity. The grid for its analysis proposed by this collection may also be applied to other national parliaments, so contributing to the development of comparative research in this field.

The Continuity of Legal Systems in Theory and Practice examines a persistent and fascinating question about the continuity of legal systems: when is a legal system existing at one time the same legal system that exists at another time? The book's distinctive approach to this question is to combine abstract critical analysis of two of the most developed theories of legal systems, those of Hans Kelsen and Joseph Raz, with an evaluation of their capacity, in practice, to explain the facts, attitudes and normative standards for which they purport to account. That evaluation is undertaken by reference to Australian constitutional law and history, whose diverse and complex phenomena make it particularly apt for evaluating the theories' explanatory power. In testing whether the depiction of Australian law presented by each theory achieves an adequate 'fit' with historical facts, the book also contributes to the understanding of Australian law and legal systems between 1788 and 2001. By collating the relevant Australian materials systematically for the first time, it presents the case for reconceptualising the role of Imperial laws and institutions during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and clarifies the interrelationship between Colonial, State, Commonwealth and Imperial legal systems, both before and after Federation.

Constitutional orders constitute political communities - and international orders deriving from them - by managing conflicts that threaten peace. This book explores how a European political community can be advanced through EU constitutional law. The constitutional role of the Union is to ensure peace by addressing two types of conflict. The first are static conflicts of interests between the national polities in the EU. These are avoided by ensuring reciprocal non-interference between Member States in the Union through deregulation in Union law. The second are dynamic conflicts of ideas about positive liberty held by the peoples of Europe. These can be resolved through regulation in a European political space. Here, EU law enables a continuous process of re-negotiating a shared European idea of positive liberty that can be accepted as its own by each national polity in the EU. These solutions to the two types of conflicts correspond to the liberal and republican models for Europe. The claim of this book is that the constitutional design of Europe presents both liberal and republican features. Taking an innovative approach, which draws on arguments from substantive law, constitutional theory, case law analysis, insights from psychology and philosophy, it identifies how best to strengthen the Union through constitutional law.

The Age of Foolishness is a doubter's guide to current lawyerly thinking about all things related to constitutionalism in a democracy. This book offers a thorough-going skeptical critique of the views that dominate our legal caste, including in law schools and among judges, and place too much weight on judges to resolve important social policy disputes and too little on democratic politics. The author argues that politics matters in a way that our legal orthodoxy often downplays.

In the 1830s, the French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville wrote that 'insufferable despotism' would prevail if America ever acquired a national administrative state. Today's Tea Partiers evidently believe that, after a great wrong turn in the early twentieth century, Tocqueville's nightmare has come true. In those years, it seems, a group of radicals, seduced by alien ideologies, created vast bureaucracies that continue to trample on individual freedom. Tocqueville's Nightmare, shows, to the contrary, that the nation's best corporate lawyers were among the creators of 'commission government,' that supporters were more interested in purging government of corruption than creating a socialist utopia, and that the principles of individual rights, limited government, and due process were designed into the administrative state. Far from following 'un-American' models, American statebuilders rejected the leading European scheme for constraining government, the Rechtsstaat, a state of rules. Instead, they looked to an Anglo-American tradition that equated the rule of law with the rule of courts and counted on judges to review the bases for administrators' decisions aggressively. Soon, however, even judges realized that strict judicial review shifted to generalist courts decisions best left to experts. The most masterful judges, including Charles Evans Hughes, Chief Justice of the United States from 1930 to 1941, ultimately decided that a 'day in court' was unnecessary if individuals had already had a 'day in commission' where the fundamentals of due process and fair play prevailed. Not only did this procedural notion of the rule of law solve the judges' puzzle of reconciling bureaucracy and freedom; it also assured lawyers that their expertise in the ways of the courts would remain valuable and professional politicians that presidents would not use administratively distributed largess as an independent source of political power.

Roman Law's Influence on Public Law and the State This collection of eleven distinguished essays explores the revival of Roman law and its subsequent influence on the development of public law and early modern theories of the state. "This very fine book deserves to be judged as something more than a mere collection of scattered essays. There is an impressive unity of thought and argument running through all the various studies, and together they form a coherent and extremely valuable contribution to a recent movement of thought that has been reshaping our understanding of the principles on which medieval government was based."--Brian Tierney, Harvard Law Review 78 (1964-1965):1502 GAINES POST 1902-1987] received an M.A. in 1925 and Ph.D. in 1931 at Harvard University. He researched medieval history and culture at the Ecole de Chartres in France from 1927-1928 and also conducted research in Italy, Germany, and England. Post was a member of the Department of History at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, from 1935 to 1941, a lecturer at the Riccoboro Seminar in 1947, and a lecturer at the Medieval Institute at the University of Notre Dame. Some of his many accomplishments include a Fulbright research award to France in 1951-1952, two Guggenheim Fellowships (1939-1940 and 1955-1956) and an honorary fellowship in the American Society for Legal History. While an instructor at Princeton University from 1959-1960 he was the chairman of the Institute of Research and Study in Medieval Canon Law. In 1954 he accepted a faculty position at Princeton University, where he remained until his retirement in 1970.