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.

Judges don't just discover the law, they create it. A renowned and much-used analysis of the process of judicial decision-making, now in a library-quality cloth edition with modern formatting and presentation. Includes embedded page numbers from the original 1921 edition for continuity of citations and syllabi. Features a new, explanatory Foreword by Justice Cardozo's premier biographer, Andrew L. Kaufman, senior professor at Harvard Law School and author of "Cardozo" (Harvard Univ. Press, 1998).Justice Benjamin Nathan Cardozo (1870-1938) offered the world a candid and self-conscious study of how judges decide cases and the law - they are lawmakers and not just law-appliers, he knew - all drawn from his insights and experience on the bench in a way that no judge had done before. Asked the basic questions, "What is it that I do when I decide a case? To what sources of information do I appeal for guidance?," Cardozo answered them in his methodical, rich, and timeless prose, explaining the proper use of such decisional tools as logic and analogy to precedent; analysis of history and tradition; application of public policy, community mores, and sociology; and even the subconscious forces that drive judges' decisions. This book has impacted the introspective examination of the lawmaking process of the courts in a way no other book has had. It continues to be read today by lawyers and judges, law students and scholars, historians and political scientists, and philosophers - among others interested in how judges really think and the tools they employ.Judges are people, and lawmakers, too. "The great tides and currents which engulf the rest of men, do not turn aside in their course, and pass the judges by. We like to figure to ourselves the processes of justice as coldly objective and impersonal. The law, conceived of as a real existence, dwelling apart and alone, speaks, through the voices of priests and ministers, the words which they have no choice except to utter. ...It has a lofty sound; it is well and finely said; but it can never be more than partly true." Beyond precedential cases and tradition, judges make choices, using methods of analysis and biases that ought to be examined.Famous at the time for his trenchant and fluid opinions as a Justice on New York's highest court - he is still studied on questions of torts, contracts, and business law - and later a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Cardozo filled the lecture hall at Yale when he finally answered the frank query into what judges do and how do they do it. The lectures became a landmark book and a source for all other studies of the ways of a judge. Brought to a new generation by Professor Kaufman, and presented as part of the properly formatted Legal Legends Series of Quid Pro Books, this edition is the understandable and usable rendition of a classic work of law and politics.

This thought-provoking book investigates the increasingly important subject of constitutional idolatry and its effects on democracy. Focused around whether the UK should draft a single written constitution, it suggests that constitutions have been drastically and persistently over-sold throughout the years, and that their wider importance and effects are not nearly as significant as constitutional advocates maintain. Analysing a number of issues in relation to constitutional performance, including whether these documents can educate the citizenry, invigorate voter turnout, or deliver 'We the People' sovereignty, the author finds written constitutions consistently failing to meet expectations. This innovative book also examines how constitutional idolatry may frustrate and distort constitutional change, and can lead to strong forms of constitutional paternalism emerging within the state. Ultimately, the book argues that idolising written constitutions is a hollow endeavour that will fail to produce better democratic outcomes or help solve increasingly complicated societal problems. Engaging and accessible, Constitutional Idolatry and Democracy will be a key resource for both new and established scholars interested in comparative constitutional law, constitutional theory, law and democracy and written vs. unwritten constitutions.

This book of essays celebrates Mark Aronson's contribution to administrative law. As joint author of the leading Australian text on judicial review of administrative action, Aronson's work is well-known to public lawyers throughout the common law world and this is reflected in the list of contributors from the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK. The introduction comes from Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia. The essays reflect Aronson's interests in judicial review, non-judicial grievance mechanisms, problems of proof and evidence, and the boundaries of public and private law. Amongst the contributors, Peter Cane, Elizabeth Fisher, and Linda Pearson write on administrative adjudication and decision-making, Anita Stuhmcke writes on Ombudsmen, and Robin Creyke and John McMillan, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, write on charters, codes and 'soft law'. There are evaluations of the profound influence of human rights law on judicial review from the UK by Sir Jack Beatson and Thomas Poole and from Canada by David Mullan. Matthew Groves and Chief Justice James Spigelman address developing themes in judicial review, while Carol Harlow, Richard Rawlings, Michael Taggart and Janet McLean follow Aronson's interests into the private side of public law. An American perspective is added by Alfred Aman and Jack Beermann.

Magna Carta ITS ROLE IN THE MAKING OF THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION 1300-1629 by FAITH THOMPSON Associate Professor of History University of Minnesota THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PRESS, Minneapolis LONDON GEOFFREY CTTMBEKLBGB OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Copyright 1948 by the UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher. Permission is hereby granted to review ers to quote brief passages in a review to be printed in a magazine or newspaper. Second Printing 1950 Old London Bridge From Gordon Homes Old London Bridge Job Lane the Bodley Head Ltd, PREFACE Magna Carta is well called the oldest of liberty, documents. It has come to serve as the prototype of all bills of rights, a symbol, a slogan that conies readily to the tongue of a public speaker. Its history, in these days when human progress seems to depend on the success of a world charter, may seem of mere antiquarian interest. Yet the New Yor Times of January n, 1946, saw fit to devote nearly a column to a description of the ceremony in which Dr. Luther H. Evans, Librarian of Congress, handed to his majes tys minister, John Balfour, one of the original parchment copies of the Great Charter for return to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln Cathedral. Of the Charter, during its stay in the United States, Dr. Evans said Fifteen million Americans have made pilgrimage to see it American arms have been its guard. Mr. Balfour termed the Charter the forefather of the British and American bills of rights, the American Habeas Corpus Act, and the Declaration of Independence. The Federal Constitution of the United States, Mr. Balfour said, contained many of itsprovisions and even some of its actual words and this in turn has been the model for many constitutions in many lands. The line of descent extends to our time and we can, without flight of fancy, trace as an authentic offspring the preamble to the Charter of the United Nations. Here is a lineage without equal in human history. For this we honor the Great Charter, and for this, not as Britons or as Americans, but as members of the whole brotherhood of free peoples, we give our thanks to the Librarians of Congress for the care with which during these momentous years, they have guarded a document that is beyond re placement and above price. Magna Carta is not the private property of the British people. It belongs equally to you and to all who at any time and in any land have fought for freedom under the law. la the words of Professor A. B. White Today we study its history, yes terday it was our political Bible. If it became something of a myth few would question that the myth has been beneficent and still is. It was through Professor White that my interest in Magna Carta history was first awakened while preparing under his direction at the University of Minnesota a doctoral dissertation, published as The First Century of Magna Carta These studies attempt to trace through three more centuries the varied uses and increasingly significant interpretations of the famous document. It is a pleasure to express to Professor White my gratitude for his continued in terest and stimulating suggestions, and for reading parts of the manuscript. VI PREFACE The opportunity to use valuable sources available only in England was made possible by a Guggenheim Fellowship for the year 1938-39, For this I expresshearty thanks to the foundation, as well as to the Graduate School of the University of Minnesota for a grant-in-aid for a research assistant. I am indebted to Mr. Pulling of the Harvard Law Library, and to Professor Bade and Miss Caroline Brede of the University of Minnesota Law Library, for permission and aid in using their remarkable collections of early printed law books. Acknowledgment is also due the Treasurer and Masters of the Bench of the Inner Temple for permission to use certain Inner Temple Library manuscripts...

The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law is an instructional textbook for attorneys who want to become experts in the field of negligence law. The book provides a comprehensive analysis of the law in a multitude of areas within the field, including the various types of construction accidents, motor vehicle accidents, premises accidents, and more. The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law also provides a detailed roadmap - from intake through trial - to successfully litigating each of these claims and, ultimately, maximizing monetary compensation for accident victims and their families.

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.

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.

Over the past few years, e-government has been rapidly changing the way governmental services are provided to citizens and businesses. These services improve business and government exchange capability, provide a new way to discover and share information, and play a part in the evolution of future technologies. The Handbook of Research on Democratic Strategies and Citizen-Centered E-Government Services seeks to address which services in e-government should be provided to users and how. This premier reference work gives an overview of the latest achievements in the field of e-government services, provides in-depth analysis of and research on the development and deployment of cutting-edge applications, and provides insight into future trends for researchers, teachers, students, government workers, and IT professionals.

Legal reasoning, pronouncements of judgment, the design and implementation of statutes, and even constitution-making and discourse all depend on timing. This compelling study examines the diverse interactions between law and time, and provides important perspectives on how law's architecture can be understood through time. The book reconsiders older work on legal transitions and breaks new ground on timing rules, especially with respect to how judges, legislators and regulators use time as a tool when devising new rules. At its core, The Timing of Lawmaking goes directly to the heart of the most basic of legal debates: when should we respect the past, and when should we make a clean break for the future? This unique resource draws on examples from administrative law, banking law, budget law, constitutional law, criminal law, environmental law, inheritance law, national security law, tax law, and tort law, and will be of interest to academics studying law, political science and economics, as well as to policymakers, legislators, and judges. Contributors include: E. Alston, F. Fagan, D.A. Farber, J.E. Gersen, T. Ginsburg, D. Kamin, S. Levmore, A. Niblett, M.C. Nussbaum, E.A. Posner, J.M. Ramseyer, A.M. Samaha, D. Shaviro, J. Suk

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.

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 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.

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.

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'.

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.

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.