Analyzes the history of enslaved African Americans' relationship with the criminal courts of the Old Dominion during a 160-year period. Schwarz's study is based on more than 4,000 trials from the colonial, early national, and antebellum periods. This book provides a fascinating portrayal of slave culture and slave resistance to white Society, not only as a means of resistance against oppression, but also as a means of individual empowerment.

House of Lords reform is often characterised as unfinished business: a riddle that has been left unanswered since 1911. But rarely can an unanswered riddle have had so many answers offered, even though few have been accepted; indeed, when Viscount Cave was invited in the mid-1920s to lead a Cabinet committee on Lords reform, he complained of finding 'the ground covered by an embarrassing mass of proposals'.That embarrassing mass increased throughout the twentieth century. Much ink has been spilled on what should be done with the upper House of Parliament; much less ink has been expended on why reform has been so difficult to achieve. This book analyses in detail the principal attempts to reform the House of Lords. Starting with the Parliament Act of 1911 the book examines the century of non-reform that followed, drawing upon substantial archival sources, many of which have been under-utilised until now. These sources challenge many of the existing understandings of the history of House of Lords reform and the reasons for success or failure of reform attempts. The book begins by arguing against the popular idea that the 1911 Act was intended by its supporters to be a temporary measure. 'No one - peers included - should be allowed to pronounce about the future of the House of Lords without reading Chris Ballinger's authoritative, shrewd and readable account about reform attempts over the past century. He punctures several widely-held myths and claims in the current debate.' Rt Hon Peter Riddell CBE Director, Institute for Government and former Hansard Society chair 'This is at once an impeccably researched academic study, and a thoroughly readable account loaded with lessons for today's would-be Lords reformers.' Lord (David) Lipsey

Arguing about matters of public policy is ubiquitous in democracies. The ability to resolve conflicts through peaceful contestation is a measure of any well-ordered society. Arguing is almost as ubiquitous in international affairs, yet it is not viewed as an important element of world order. In The Power of Deliberation: International Law, Politics and Organizations, Ian Johnstone challenges the assumption that arguing is mere lip service with no real impact on the behavior of states or the structure of the international system. Johnstone focuses on legal argumentation and asks why, if the rhetoric of law is inconsequential, governments and other international actors bother engaging in it.
Johnstone joins the efforts of international relations scholars and democracy theorists who consider why argumentation occurs beyond nation states. He focuses on deliberation in and around international organizations, drawing on various strands of legal, political and international relations theory to identify common features of legal argumentation and deliberative politics. Johnstone's central claim is that international organizations are places where "interpretive communities" coalesce, and the quality of the deliberations these communities provoke is a measure of the legitimacy of the organization.

The third edition of this book incorporates more than 10 years of fascinating dynamics since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. Apart from analysing the general basis of the Union's external action and its relationship to international law, the book explores the law and practice of the EU in more specialized fields of external action, such as common commercial policy, neighbourhood policy, development cooperation, cooperation with third countries, humanitarian aid, external environmental policy, and common foreign and security policy, as well as EU sanctions. Five years after the second edition published, this fully updated edition contains major developments within the law itself, along with changes and restructuring of the themes within the book. Carefully selected primary documents are accompanied with analytic commentary on the issues they raise and their significance for the overall structure of EU external relations law. The primary materials selected include many important legal documents that are hard to find elsewhere but give a vital insight into the operation of EU external relations law in practice.

Constitutional amendments, like all laws, may lead to unanticipated and even undesired outcomes. In this collection of original essays, a team of distinguished historians, political scientists, and legal scholars led by award-winning constitutional historian David E. Kyvig examines significant instances in which reform produced something other than the foreseen result. An opening essay examines the intentions of the Constitution's framers in creating an amending mechanism and then explores unexpected uses of that instrument. Thereafter, authors focus on the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments, addressing such subjects as criminal justice procedures, the presidential election system, the Civil War's impact on race and gender relations, the experiment in national prohibition, women's suffrage, and, finally, limits on the presidency. Together these contributions illuminate aspects of constitutional stability and evolution, challenging current thinking about reform within the formal system of change provided by Article V of the Constitution. Forcefully demonstrating that constitutional law is not immune to unanticipated consequences, the eight scholars underscore the need for care, responsibility, and historical awareness in altering the nation's fundamental law.

This book addresses a seemingly paradoxical situation. On the one hand, nationalism from Scotland to the Ukraine remains a resilient political dynamic, fostering secessionist movements below the level of the state. On the other, the competence and capacity of states, and indeed the coherence of nationalism as an ideology, are increasingly challenged by patterns of globalisation in commerce, cultural communication and constitutional authority beyond the state. It is the aim of this book to shed light on the relationship between these two processes, addressing why the political currency of nationalism remains strong even when the salience of its objective - independent and autonomous statehood - becomes ever more attenuated. The book takes an interdisciplinary approach both within law and beyond, with contributions from international law, constitutional law, constitutional theory, history, political science and sociology. The challenge for our time is considerable. Global networks grow ever more sophisticated while territorial borders, such as those in Eastern and Central Europe, become seemingly more unstable. It is hoped that this book, by bringing together areas of scholarship which have not communicated with one another as much as they might, will help develop an ongoing dialogue across disciplines with which better to understand these challenging, and potentially destabilising, developments.

For decades, administrations of both political parties have used cost-benefit analysis to evaluate and improve federal policy in a variety of areas, including health and the environment. Today, this model is under grave threat. In Reviving Rationality, Michael Livermore and Richard Revesz explain how Donald Trump has destabilized the decades-long bipartisan consensus that federal agencies must base their decisions on evidence, expertise, and analysis. Administrative agencies are charged by law with protecting values like stable financial markets and clean air. Their decisions often have profound consequences, affecting everything from the safety of workplaces to access to the dream of home ownership. Under the Trump administration, agencies have been hampered in their ability to advance these missions by the conflicting ideological whims of a changing cast of political appointees and overwhelming pressure from well-connected interest groups. Inconvenient evidence has been ignored, experts have been sidelined, and analysis has been used to obscure facts, rather than inform the public. The results are grim: incoherent policy, social division, defeats in court, a demoralized federal workforce, and a loss of faith in government's ability to respond to pressing problems. This experiment in abandoning the norms of good governance has been a disaster. Reviving Rationality explains how and why our government has abandoned rationality in recent years, and why it is so important for future administrations to restore rigorous cost-benefit analysis if we are to return to a policymaking approach that effectively tackles the most pressing problems of our era.

More than the story of one man's case, this book tells the story of entire generations of people marked as "mixed race" in America amid slavery and its aftermath, and being officially denied their multicultural identity and personal rights as a result. Contrary to popular misconceptions, Plessy v. Ferguson was not a simple case of black vs. white separation, but rather a challenging and complex protest for U.S. law to fully accept mixed ancestry and multiculturalism. This book focuses on the long struggle for individual identity and multicultural recognition amid the dehumanizing and depersonalizing forces of American Negro slavery-and the Anglo-American white supremacy that drove it. The book takes students and general readers through the extended gestation period that gave birth to one of the most oft-mentioned but widely misunderstood landmark law will cases in U.S. history. It provides a chronology, brief biographies of key figures, primary documents, an annotated bibliography, and an index all of which provide easy reading and quick reference. Modern readers will find the direct connections between Plessy's story and contemporary racial currents in America intriguing.

In this provocative new study, Iain McLean argues that the traditional story of the British constitution does not make sense. It purports to be both positive and normative: that is, to describe both how people actually behave and how they ought to behave. In fact, it fails to do either; it is not a correct description and it has no persuasive force. The book goes on to offer a reasoned alternative.
The position that still dominates the field of constitutional law is that of parliamentary sovereignty (or supremacy). According to this view, the supreme lawgiver in the United Kingdom is Parliament. Some writers in this tradition go on to insist that Parliament in turn derives its authority from the people, because the people elect Parliament. An obvious problem with this view is that Parliament, to a lawyer, comprises three houses: monarch, Lords, and Commons. The people elect only one of those three houses.
This book aims to show, contrary to the prevailing view, that the UK exists by virtue of a constitutional contract between two previously independent states. Professor McLean argues that the work of the influential constitutional theorist A.V. Dicey has little to offer those who really want to understand the nature of the constitution. Instead, greater understanding can be gleaned from considering the 'veto plays' and 'credible threats' available to politicians since 1707. He suggests that the idea that the people are sovereign dates back to the 17th century (maybe the 14th in Scotland), but has gone underground in English constitutional writing. He goes on to show that devolution and the UK's relationship with the rest of Europe have taken the UK along a constitutionalist road since 1972, and perhaps since 1920. He concludes that no intellectually defensible case can be made for retaining an unelected house of Parliament, an unelected head of state, or an established church.
The book will be essential reading for political scientists, constitutional lawyers, historians, and politicians alike.

Reprint of the third and final edition. "Having observed in the Course of our English History many Attempts made (by the Ministers of some artful and designing Princes) to weaken and undermine the ancient, legal, and fundamental Rights, Liberties, and Privileges of the City and Citizens of London: i thought myself obliged to Endeavor to collect and ascertain such Laws, Customs, and Usages of the said City, Wherein the Original Constitution and Foundation of its Government seem to have been laid; and whereby its Happiness, Opulency, and Glory do (under God and his present Majesty) evidently subsist." (Preface). Though little is known about him personally, Bohun was an attorney and prolific author who published well-received treatises on legal education, pleading, ecclesiastical law and other subjects.