This book offers an in-depth analysis of the function of certification in general and of certification systems in a range of different sectors. The authors examine certification from both a theoretical and a practical standpoint and from the perspectives of different disciplines, including law, economics, management, and the social sciences. They also discuss instruments that help ensure the quality of certification, which can range from public law measures such as accreditation, to private law incentives, to deterrents, such as liability towards victims. Further, they assess the role of competition between certification bodies. Readers will learn the commonalities as well as the necessary distinctions between certification bodies in various fields, which may stem from the different functions they serve. These similarities and differences may also be the result of different types of damage that the certified producer or service provider could potentially cause to individuals or to the public at large. Often, companies use certification bodies as an argument to assure the general public, e.g. regarding the safety of medical products. Closer inspection reveals, however, that sometimes certification bodies themselves lack credibility. The book offers essential information on the benefits and pitfalls associated with certification.

In 1919 American Communist Party member Benjamin Gitlow was arrested for distributing a "Left Wing Manifesto," a publication inspired by the Russian Revolution. He was charged with violating New York's Criminal Anarchy Law of 1902, which outlawed the advocacy of any doctrine advocating to the violent overthrow of government. Gitlow argued that the law violated his right to free speech but was still convicted. He appealed and five years later the Supreme Court upheld his sentence by a vote of 7-2.

Throughout the legal proceedings, much attention was devoted to the "bad tendency" doctrine-the idea that speakers and writers were responsible for the probable effects of their words-which the Supreme Court explicitly endorsed in its decision. According to Justice Edward T. Sanford, "A state may punish utterances endangering the foundations of organized government and threatening its overthrow by unlawful means."

More important was Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' dissent, in which he argued that the mere expression of ideas, separated from action, could not be punished under the "clear and present danger" doctrine. As Holmes put it, "Every idea is an incitement"--and the expression of an idea, no matter how disagreeable, was protected by the First Amendment. While the majority disagreed, it also raised and endorsed the idea that the Bill of Rights could be violated by neither the federal government nor individual states--an idea known as "incorporation" that was addressed for the first time in this case.

In recreating Gitlow, Marc Lendler opens up the world of American radicalism and brings back into focus a number of key figures in American law: defense attorney Clarence Darrow; New York Court of Appeals justices Roscoe Pound and Benjamin Cardozo; Walter Pollak of the fledgling ACLU; and dissenting justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis. Lendler also traces the origins of the incorporation doctrine and the ebb and flow of Gitlow as a precedent through the end of the Cold War.

In a time when Islamic radicalism raises many of the same questions as domestic Communism did, Lendler's cogent explication of this landmark case helps students and Court-watchers alike better understand "clear and present danger" tests, ongoing debates over incitement, and the importance of the Holmes-Brandeis dissent in our jurisprudence.

Using a key religious freedom Act, the book analyzes legislative process, Supreme Court jurisprudence, and discusses the role of religion in public life. "Religious Free Exercise and Contemporary American Politics" explains why the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) had to undergo a major metamorphosis in order to win approval. The book uses this episode as a window onto the dynamics of modern constitutional politics, specifically the constitutional politics of free exercise. The book argues that, although free exercise of religion remains an important value in American politics, it has been severely buffeted by both liberal individualism and identity politics. The former equates religious 'choice' with all other types of choices one makes in life, the latter sees religious identity as equivalent to racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientation identities. These two views coalesced in the late 1990s to force major modifications in the proposed Religious Liberty Protection Act, succeeding in limiting its reach only to prisoners and land use disputes. Written in an accessible manner for students of politics and religion as well as constitutional politics and law, the book offers a unique perspective on religious freedom in American politics.

In his widely acclaimed volume Our Undemocratic Constitution, Sanford Levinson boldly argued that our Constitution should not be treated with "sanctimonious reverence," but as a badly flawed document deserving revision. Now Levinson takes us deeper, asking what were the original assumptions underlying our institutions, and whether we accept those assumptions 225 years later. In Framed, Levinson challenges our belief that the most important features of our constitutions concern what rights they protect. Instead, he focuses on the fundamental procedures of governance such as congressional bicameralism; the selection of the President by the electoral college, or the dimensions of the President's veto power-not to mention the near impossibility of amending the United States Constitution. These seemingly "settled" and "hardwired" structures contribute to the now almost universally recognized "dysfunctionality" of American politics. Levinson argues that we should stop treating the United States Constitution as uniquely exemplifying the American constitutional tradition. We should be aware of the 50 state constitutions, often interestingly different-and perhaps better-than the national model. Many states have updated their constitutions by frequent amendment or by complete replacement via state constitutional conventions. California's ungovernable condition has prompted serious calls for a constitutional convention. This constant churn indicates that basic law often reaches the point where it fails and becomes obsolete. Given the experience of so many states, he writes, surely it is reasonable to believe that the U.S. Constitution merits its own updating. Whether we are concerned about making America more genuinely democratic or only about creating a system of government that can more effectively respond to contemporary challenges, we must confront the ways our constitutions, especially the United States Constitution, must be changed in fundamental ways.

This textbook provides a thorough and accessible introduction to the basic principles of United Kingdom Constitutional and Administrative Law, including Human Rights Law. It has been revised and updated to reflect recent developments, both legal and political. The fundamental concepts of UK Constitutional and Administrative Law are explained in a clear, engaging, succinct style, making them straightforward for students to understand so they build up their knowledge of the subject systematically and thoroughly. This book is also an essential starting point for more advanced law students and a valuable source of legal context for political science students alike. Both authoritative and accessible, it enables the reader to appreciate the nature and complexity of this most fundamental part of our legal system. New to this Edition: - Updated content on Brexit, in particular the changing relationship between Government and Parliament as reflected in the various votes which have taken place over the past few years. - Questions about the nature of parliamentary proceedings, the role and independence of the Speaker of the House of Commons, and the prerogative power to prorogue Parliament - Issues more tangentially related to Brexit such as the process for appointment of a new Prime Minister and arrangements in hung parliaments - Important issues in relation to the position of the devolved governments and legislatures vis-a-vis Westminster and more broadly on the implications for creation of a written constitution - The continuing utility (or otherwise) of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011

This book emerged from an extended seminar series held in Edinburgh Law School which sought to explore the complex constitutional arrangements of the European legal space as an inter-connected mosaic. There has been much recent debate concerning the constitutional future of Europe, focusing almost exclusively upon the EU in the context of the (failed) Constitutional Treaty of 2003-5 and the subsequent Treatyof Lisbon. The premise of the book is that this focus, while indispensable, offers only a partial vision of the complex constitutional terrain of contemporary Europe. In addition, it is essential to explore other threads of normative authority within and across states, embracing internal challenges to state-level constitutional regimes; the growing jurisprudential assertiveness of the Council of Europe regime through the ECHR and various democracy-building measures; as well as Europe's ever thicker relations, both with its border regions and with broader international institutions, especially those of the United Nations. Together these developments create increasingly dense networks of constitutional authority within the European space. This fluid and multi-dimensional dynamic is difficult to classify, and indeed may seem in many ways impenetrable, but that makes the explanatory challenge all the more important and pressing. Without this fuller picture it becomes impossible to understand the legal context of Europe today or the prospects of ongoing changes. The book brings together a range of experts in law, legal theory and political science from across Europe in order to address these complex issues and to supply illustrative case-studies in the topical areas of the constitutionalisation of European labour law and European criminal law.

Vernon Bogdanor once told The Guardian that he made 'a living of something that doesn't exist'. He also quipped that the British Constitution can be summed up in eight words: 'Whatever the Queen in Parliament decides is law.' That may still be the case, yet in many ways the once elusive British Constitution has now become much more grounded, much more tangible and much more based on written sources than was previously the case. It now exists in a way in which it previously did not. However, though the changes may seem revolutionary, much of the underlying structure remains unchanged; there are limits to the changes. Where does all this leave the Constitution? Here constitutional experts, political scientists and legal practitioners present up-to-date and in-depth commentaries on their respective areas of expertise. While also a Festschrift in honour of Vernon Bogdanor, this book is above all a comprehensive compendium on the present state of the British Constitution. 'The new constitutional politics has spawned a new constitutional scholarship. This stimulating collection, skilfully put together by Matt Qvortrup, works both as a welcome snapshot of where we are now and as an expert audit, from specialists in law, history and political science, of the deeper issues and of the complex dynamics of continuity and change in the ongoing refashioning of Britain's constitutional architecture.' Kevin Theakston, Professor of British Government, University of Leeds 'The highly distinguished team of scholars assembled by Matt Qvortrup has produced a deeply thought-provoking collection on the profound constitutional changes that have occurred in the UK over the last twenty years. A book worthy of reaching a very wide readership.' Roger Scully, Professor of Political Science, Cardiff University 'Vernon Bogdanor understands like few others the connections between history, politics and institutions - and that is what makes him such an authority on the British system of government.' The Rt Hon David Cameron MP, Prime Minister 'I think Vernon's guiding principle at Brasenose was to treat all his students as if they might one day be Prime Minister. At the time, I thought this was a bit over the top, but then a boy studying PPE at Brasenose two years beneath me became Prime Minister.' Toby Young, The Spectator

The Real World of EU Accountability reports the findings of a major empirical study into patterns and practices of accountability in European governance. The product of a 4-year, path-breaking project, this book assesses to what extent and how the people that populate the key arenas where European public policy is made or implemented are held accountable. Using a systematic analytical framework, it examines not just the formal accountability arrangements but also documents and compares how these operate in practice. In doing so, it provides a unique, empirically grounded contribution to the pivotal but often remarkably fact-free debate about democracy and accountability in European governance.
With four empirical chapters covering the Commission and its agencies, the European Council, and Comitology committees, it shows that a web of formal accountability arrangements has been woven around most of them, but that the extent to which the relevant accountability forums actually use the oversight possibilities offered to them varies markedly: some forums lack the institutional resources, others the willingness. But in those cases where both are on the increase, as in the European Parliament's efforts vis a vis the European Commission, fundamentally healthy accountability relationships are developing. Although ex-post accountability is only part of the larger equation determining the democratic quality of European governance, this study suggests that at least in this area, the EU is slowly but surely reducing its 'democratic deficit'.

Paul Cavill offers a major reinterpretation of early Tudor constitutional history. In the grand "Whig" tradition, the parliaments of Henry VII were a disappointing retreat from the onward march towards parliamentary democracy. The king was at best indifferent and at worst hostile to parliament; its meetings were cowed and quiescent, subservient to the royal will. Yet little research has tested these assumptions.
Drawing on extensive archival research, Cavill challenges existing accounts and revises our understanding of the period. Neither to the king nor to his subjects did parliament appear to be a waning institution, fading before the waxing power of the crown. For a ruler in Henry's vulnerable position, parliament helped to restore royal authority by securing the good governance that legitimated his regime. For his subjects, parliament served as a medium through which to communicate with the government and to shape--and, on occasion, criticize--its policies. Because of the demands parliament made, its impact was felt throughout the kingdom, among ordinary people as well as among the elite. Cooperation between subjects and the crown, rather than conflict, characterized these parliaments.
While for many scholars parliament did not truly come of age until the 1530s, when-freed from its medieval shackles-the modern institution came to embody the sovereign nation state, in this study Henry's reign emerges as a constitutionally innovative period. Ideas of parliamentary sovereignty were already beginning to be articulated. It was here that the foundations of the "Tudor revolution in government" were being laid.

This work discusses the major court decisions that answer the important questions affecting freedom of the press, providing illustrations and examples that give insight into this complex body of law. The clear and concise style of the book makes it an essential guide for all those interested in freedom of the press. The book begins with an analysis of the text of the First Amendment and demonstrates how the seemingly simple text has given rise to complicated issues and interpretations. It also discusses the historical evolution of our current understanding of the justifications offered to protect freedom of expression. A number of important questions that have arisen in First Amendment law are discussed in detail.

This new edition of Norgren and Nanda's classic updates their examination of the intersection of American cultural pluralism and law. They document and analyze legal challenges to the existing social order raised by many cultural groups, among them, Native Americans and Native Hawaiians, homeless persons, immigrants, disabled persons, and Rastafarians. In addition, they examine such current controversies as the culture wars in American schools and the impact of post-9/11 security measures on Arab and Muslim individuals and communities. The book also discusses more traditional challenges to the American legal system by women, homosexuals, African Americans, Latinos, Japanese Americans, and the Mormons and the Amish. The new chapters and updated analyses in this Third Edition reflect recent, relevant court cases dealing with culture, race, gender, religion, and personal status. Drawing on court materials, state and federal legislation, and legal ethnographies, the text analyzes the ongoing tension between, on the one hand, the need of different groups for cultural autonomy and equal rights, and on the other, the necessity of national unity and security. The text integrates the authors' commentary with case descriptions set in historical, cultural, political, and economic context. While the authors' thesis is that law is an instrument of social policy that has generally furthered an assimilationist agenda in American society, they also point out how in different periods, under different circumstances, and with regard to different groups, law has also some opportunity for cultural autonomy.

In 2009 and 2010, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights underwent significant reforms to their respective judicial appointments processes. Though very different judicial institutions, they adopted very similar - and rather remarkable - reforms: each would now make use of an expert panel of judicial notables to vet the candidates proposed to sit in Luxembourg or Strasbourg. Once established, these two vetting panels then followed with actions no less extraordinary: they each immediately took to rejecting a sizable percentage of the judicial candidates proposed by the Member State governments. What had happened? Why would the Member States of the European Union and of the Council of Europe, which had established judicial appointments processes that all but ensured themselves the unfettered power to designate their preferred judges to the European courts, and who had zealously maintained and exercised that power over the course of some fifty years, suddenly decide to undermine their own capacity to continue to do so? This book sets out to solve this mystery. Its point of departure is that it would be a mistake to view the 2009-2010 establishment of the two vetting panels in isolation from other European judicial developments. Though these acts of institutional creation are certainly the most notable recent developments, they actually represent but the crowning achievement of a process of European judicial appointments reform that has been running unremittingly since the 1990's. This longstanding and tenacious movement has actually triggered a broad set of interrelated debates and reforms, encompassing not only judicial appointments per se, but also a much wider set of issues, including judicial independence, judicial quality, judicial councils, the separation of powers, judicial gender equity, and more.

The status of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in the contemporary UK Constitution is much contested. Changes in the architecture of the UK Constitution, diminishing academic reverence for the doctrine, and a more expansive vision of the judicial role, all present challenges to the relevance, coherence and desirability of this constitutional fundamental. At a time when the future of the sovereignty of Parliament may look less than assured, this book develops an account of the continuing significance of the doctrine. It argues that a rejuvenation of the manner and form theory is required to understand the present status of parliamentary sovereignty. Addressing the critical challenges to the doctrine, it contends that this conception of legally unlimited legislative power provides the best explanation of contemporary developments in UK constitutional practice, while also possessing a normative appeal that has previously been unrecognised. This modern shift to the manner and form theory is located in an account of the democratic virtue of parliamentary sovereignty, with the book seeking to demonstrate the potential that exists for Parliament - through legislating about the legislative process - to revitalise the UK's political constitution.

In 2007 the International Association of Constitutional Law established an Interest Group on 'The Use of Foreign Precedents by Constitutional Judges' to conduct a survey of the use of foreign precedents by Supreme and Constitutional Courts in deciding constitutional cases. Its purpose was to determine - through empirical analysis employing both quantitative and qualitative indicators - the extent to which foreign case law is cited. The survey aimed to test the reliability of studies describing and reporting instances of transjudicial communication between Courts. The research also provides useful insights into the extent to which a progressive constitutional convergence may be taking place between common law and civil law traditions. The present work includes studies by scholars from African, American, Asian, European, Latin American and Oceania countries, representing jurisdictions belonging to both common law and civil law traditions, and countries employing both centralised and decentralised systems of judicial review. The results, published here for the first time, give us the best evidence yet of the existence and limits of a transnational constitutional communication between courts.

This multidisciplinary book introduces readers to original perspectives on crimmigration that foster holistic, contextual, and critical appreciation of the concept in Australia and its individual consequences and broader effects. This collection draws together contributions from nationally and internationally respected legal scholars and social scientists united by common and overlapping interests, who identify, critique, and reimagine crimmigration law and practice in Australia, and thereby advance understanding of this important field of inquiry. Specifically, crimmigration is addressed and analysed from a variety of standpoints, including: criminal law/justice; administrative law/justice; immigration law; international law; sociology of law; legal history feminist theory, settler colonialism, and political sociology. The book aims to: explore the historical antecedents of contemporary crimmigration and continuities with the past in Australia reveal the forces driving crimmigration and explain its relationship to border securitisation in Australia identify and examine the different facets of crimmigration, comprising: the substantive overlaps between criminal and immigration law; crimmigration processes; investigative techniques, surveillance strategies, and law enforcement agents, institutions and practices uncover the impacts of crimmigration law and practice upon the human rights and interests of non-citizens and their families. analyse crimmigration from assorted critical standpoints; including settler colonialism, race and feminist perspectives By focusing upon these issues, the book provides an interconnected collection of chapters with a cohesive narrative, notwithstanding that contributors approach the themes and specific issues from different theoretical and critical standpoints, and employ a range of research methods.

The enlargement of the EU has highlighted the challenges of compliance, but it has also helped to suggest new compliance methodologies. The combination of methodologies used by the EU and the differing levels of enforcement available are characteristic of the EU's compliance system, permitting the remarkable reach and penetration of EU norms into national systems. In this new study six authors offer their assessment of the enforcement procedures and compliance processes that have been developed to ensure Member State compliance with EU law. The first three chapters examine the merits of combing both coercive and problem-solving strategies, describing the systems in place and focusing on the different levels at which compliance mechanisms operate: national, regional, and international. It also looks at horizontal compliance as well as 'from above' compliance, creating a complex and rich picture of the EU's system.
The final three chapters of the book focus on different aspects of compliance seen from a national perspective. The first analyzes the two bases for the use of criminal sanctions to enforce EU law: the ability of Member States to choose to include criminal penalties for non-compliance in their national law; and the imposition of criminal sanctions at a national level by EU law itself. The book then moves on to a discussion of the role of national courts in ensuring Member State compliance with, and enforcement of, EU law. It examines the role of national constitutional courts in facilitating compliance with EU law and draws comparisons between EU law and international law and their interactions both with each other and with national constitutional courts.