This insightful and discerning book offers a fresh discourse on the functioning of national courts as decentralised EU courts and a new thematic for revising some older understandings of how national judges apply EU law. Organised into three key sections, the interdisciplinary chapters combine approaches and theories originating from law, political science, sociology and economics. The first section addresses issues relating to judicial dialogue and EU legal mandates, the second looks at the topic of EU law in national courts and the third considers national courts' roles in protecting fundamental rights in the area of freedom, security and justice. The analysis of each is enriched through diverse research methods such as case-law analysis, citation network analysis, interviews, surveys and statistics. With its new legal and empirical assessment covering the newest member states of the EU, National Courts and EU Law will hold strong appeal for scholars and students in the fields of EU law, social sciences and humanities. It will also be of use to legal practitioners interested in the issue of judicial application of EU law. Contributors include: M. Claes, M. de Visser, M. de Werd, M. Wind, B. de Witte, T. Evas, M. Gorski, C. Hermanin, U. Jaremba, J.A. Mayoral, D. Piqani, K. Podstawa, R. Raffaelli, U. Sadl, A. Tatham, A. Torres Perez

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.

View the Table of Contents

aFinally, an unflinching response to immigration alarmists! This brilliant, challenging book outlines an immigration proposal based on the reality that migration flows are not regulated by border enforcement but by social, economic, and political pressures.a
--Mary Romero, author of "Maid in the USA"

Seeking to re-imagine the meaning and significance of the international border, Opening the Floodgates makes a case for eliminating the border as a legal construct that impedes the movement of people into this country.

Open migration policies deserve fuller analysis, particularly on the eve of a presidential election. Kevin R. Johnson offers an alternative vision of how U.S. borders might be reconfigured, grounded in moral, economic, and policy arguments for open borders. Importantly, liberalizing migration through an open borders policy would recognize that the enforcement of closed borders cannot stifle the strong, perhaps irresistible, economic, social, and political pressures that fuel international migration.

Controversially, Johnson suggests that open borders are entirely consistent with efforts to prevent terrorism that have dominated immigration enforcement since the events of September 11, 2001. More liberal migration, he suggests, would allow for full attention to be paid to the true dangers to public safety and national security.

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.

As Americans wrestle with red-versus-blue debates over traditional values, defense of marriage, and gay rights, reason often seems to take a back seat to emotion. In response, David Richards, a widely respected legal scholar and long-time champion of gay rights, reflects upon the constitutional and democratic principles-relating to privacy, intimate life, free speech, tolerance, and conscience-that underpin these often heated debates.

The distillation of Richards's thirty-year advocacy for the rights of gays and lesbians, his book provides a reflective treatise on basic human rights that touch all of our lives. Drawing upon his own experiences as a gay man, Richards interweaves personal observations with philosophical, political, judicial, and psychological insights to make a compelling case that gays should be entitled to the same rights and protections that every American enjoys. Indeed, the call for gay rights can trace its lineage back to the powerful protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s, which demanded racial and sexual equality and ultimately overthrew the bigoted status quo.

Richards focuses particularly on two key Supreme Court cases: the 1986 decision in Bowers v. Hardwick upholding Georgia's anti-sodomy laws and the 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas striking down Texas anti-sodomy laws and overturning Bowers. He shows how Bowers arose in a period of constitutional crisis over the right to privacy and examines the opinions in light of the Court's division in Roe v. Wade. He then shows that Lawrence must be understood in the context of later cases, notably Casey and Romer, which required that Bowers be reconsidered and overruled. Along the way, he examines current debates over gays in the military and same-sex marriage, assesses the Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision to permit gay marriage, and critiques the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

Eloquent and impassioned, Richards's work crystallizes the essence of the argument for a much more expansive and tolerant view of gay rights in America. It also offers a touching account of one gay man's very personal struggle to find the voice he needed to speak truth to the powerful forces of discrimination.

This timely Research Handbook offers a systematic and comprehensive examination of the election laws of democratic nations. Through a study of a range of different regimes of election law, it illuminates the disparate choices that societies have made concerning the benefits they wish their democratic institutions to provide, the means by which such benefits are to be delivered, and the underlying values, commitments, and conceptions of democratic self-rule that inform these choices. Comparative Election Law features a wide scope of coverage, from distribution of the franchise, to candidate qualifications, to campaign speech and finance, to election administration, and more. Contributions from a range of expert scholars in the field are brought together to tackle difficult problems surrounding the definition of the democratic demos, as well as to lay bare important disjunctions between democratic ideals and feasible democratic regimes in practice. Furthermore, a comparative approach is also taken to examine democratic regimes at a theoretical as well as a descriptive level. Featuring key research in a vitally important area, this Research Handbook will be crucial reading for academics and students in a range of fields including comparative law, legal theory, political science, political theory and democracy. It will also be useful to politicians and government officials engaged in election regulation, due to its excellent perspective on the range of regulatory options and how to evaluate them.

The essays which appear in this volume have been written to pay tribute to the Hon Mr Justice Nial Fennelly, judge of the Supreme Court of Ireland and former Advocate General at the European Court of Justice, on the occasion of his retirement. The overall theme of the book is the relationship between European Union law and national law, and the role of courts in defining that relationship. The book consists of four main parts - the structure and functioning of the European Court of Justice, material issues of European Union law, aspects of Irish law and transversal issues of national and European law. The contributors are all past and present members of the European bench, members or former members of the Irish judiciary or Bar and/or experts in European Union law, many of whom have worked with Mr Justice Fennelly during his long and distinguished career at the Bar and on the bench.

Constitutional 'losers' represent a thorny and longstanding problem in American constitutional law. Given our adversarial system, the way that rights cases are decided means that regardless of whether a losing side has committed any actions that cause harm to others, they typically suffer unnecessary harm as a consequence of decisions. In areas such as affirmative action and gay rights, the losers are essentially punished for losing despite neither intending nor causing injury.
In Losing Twice, Emily Calhoun draws upon conflict resolution theory, political theory, and Habermasian discourse theory to argue that in such cases, the Court must work harder to avoid inflicting unnecessary harm on Constitutional losers. But for this to happen, Calhoun contends, the role of judges needs to be reconceptualized. She contends that the Court should not perceive itself simply as an adversarial forum, but also as a 'transactional' one, where losers are not simply losers but participants in a process capable of addressing and ameliorating the effects that come with loss. Filled with lucid discussions of well known cases, Losing Twice offers an intellectually powerful argument for transforming the decision-making process in Constitutional rights disputes.

Globalisation, Law and the State begins - as is customary in globalisation literature - with an acknowledgement of the definitional difficulties associated with globalisation. Rather than labour the point, the book identifies some economic, political and cultural dimensions to the phenomenon and uses these to analyse existing and emerging challenges to State-centric and territorial models of law and governance. It surveys three areas that are typically associated with globalisation - financial markets, the internet, and public contracts - as well as trade more generally, the environment, human rights, and national governance. On this basis it considers how global legal norms are formed, how they enmesh with the norms of other legal orders, and how they create pressure for legal harmonisation. This, in turn, leads to an analysis of the corresponding challenges that globalisation presents to traditional notions of sovereignty and the models of public law that have grown from them. While some of the themes addressed here will be familiar to students of the European process (there are prominent references to the European experience throughout the book), Globalisation, Law and the State provides a clear insight into how the sovereign space of States and their legal orders are diminishing and being replaced by an altogether more fluid system of intersecting orders and norms. This is followed by an analysis of the theory and practice of the globalisation of law, and a suggestion that the workings of law in the global era can best be conceived of in terms of networks that link together a range of actors that exist above, below and within the State, as well as on either side of the public-private divide. This book is an immensely valuable, innovative and concise study of globalisation and its effect on law and the state.

In Constitutional Orphan, Professor Paula Monopoli explores the significant role of former suffragists in the constitutional development of the Nineteenth Amendment the woman suffrage amendment ratified in 1920. She sheds new light on the connection between the suffragists as institutional actors in civil society and the emergence of a "thin" conception of the Nineteenth Amendment as a mere nondiscrimination in voting rule, rather than a robust equality norm. In this compelling legal history, Monopoli illuminates how the Nineteenth had implications for federalism, women's citizenship and the definition of equality, as well as how gender, race and class intersect to affect our constitutional development. Monopoli explores the choice by both the National Woman's Party and the National American Woman Suffrage Association to turn away from African American suffragists who were denied the vote even after ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. Using original sources, legislative history and case analysis, she develops a persuasive theory connecting that moral and strategic failure to the emergence of a narrow interpretation of the amendment. Monopoli also evaluates the impact of class divisions among former suffragist allies. These divisions around support for the NWP's Equal Rights Amendment, found social feminists opposing that "blanket" amendment for fear of its impact on the constitutional validity of protective labor legislation for working-class women. Monopoli details how many state courts, left without federal enforcement legislation to guide them, used strict construction to cabin the emergence of a more robust interpretation of the Nineteenth Amendment, as a broad equality norm. She concludes with an examination of new legal scholarship that suggests ways in which such a robust understanding of the Nineteenth Amendment could be used today to expand gender equality. In this compelling legal history, Monopoli illuminates how gender, race and class intersect to affect our constitutional development.

When the Founders penned the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, it was not difficult to identify the "persons, houses, papers, and effects" they meant to protect; nor was it hard to understand what "unreasonable searches and seizures" were. The Fourth Amendment was intended to stop the use of general warrants and writs of assistance and applied primarily to protect the home. Flash forward to a time of digital devices, automobiles, the war on drugs, and a Supreme Court dominated by several decades of the jurisprudence of crime control, and the legal meaning of everything from "effects" to "seizures" has dramatically changed. Michael C. Gizzi and R. Craig Curtis make sense of these changes in The Fourth Amendment in Flux. The book traces the development and application of search and seizure law and MYUjurisprudence over time, with particular emphasis on decisions of the Roberts Court. Cell phones, GPS tracking devices, drones, wiretaps, the Patriot Act, constantly changing technology, and a political culture that emphasizes crime control create new challenges for Fourth Amendment interpretation and jurisprudence. This work exposes the tensions caused by attempts to apply pretechnological legal doctrine to modern problems of digital privacy. In their analysis of the Roberts Court's relevant decisions, Gizzi and Curtis document the different approaches to the law that have been applied by the justices since the Obama nominees took their seats on the court. Their account, combining law, political science, and history, provides insight into the court's small group dynamics, and traces changes regarding search and seizure law in the opinions of one of its longest serving members, Justice Antonin Scalia. At a time when issues of privacy are increasingly complicated by technological advances, this overview and analysis of Fourth Amendment law is especially welcome-an invaluable resource as weaddress the enduring question of how to balance freedom against security in the context of the challenges of the twenty-firstcentury.

aThe uniquely American sense of freedom that makes the First Amendment so beloved and so respected in its homeland is precisely what makes it a difficult model for constitutional protection of expression in other political systems. In this survey of free speech policies in Canada, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom, Krotosyznski introduces American students and scholars of constitutional law to a diverse range of culturally contingent approaches to protecting the freedom of expression in other industrialized countries. . . . As Krotosyznskias fascinating project demonstrates, comparative constitutional analysis challenges us as Americans to examine critically the cultural assumptions underlying our legal system.a
--Jim Chen, University of Minnesota Law School

"There are very few scholars who are willing to read as widely in the law of the world as Krotoszynski, and very few who are capable of forming such confident and intelligent judgments."
--James Whitman, Yale Law School

"For better or worse recent Supreme Court jurisprudence evidences a growing struggle over whether and, if so, how to address foreign court decisions. Ronald Krotoszynski's first-rate analysis of the comparative dimension of free speech issues could not be more timely. Not only does his work shed important light on free speech, but it informs as well."
--Michael Heise, Cornell Law School

"Krotoszynski has produced one of the best examples of the growing literature on comparative public law. His analysis of free speech law in four modern democracies is distinctive in that it goes beyond merely describing the rules governing expression in those countries to address the deeper differences incultural attitudes that explain the disparate legal outcomes. His sophisticated treatment of the intersecting lines of theory, doctrine, and culture makes this the most thorough and compelling assessment of comparative free speech law on the market today."
--Steven G. Gey, David and Deborah Fonvielle & Donald and Janet Hinkle Professor of Law, Florida State University College of Law

Krotoszynskias conclusions are revealing and forcefully presented. This is especially so when they are based on the authoras sophisticated and copiously documented comparison of the US with four advanced legal systems committed to participatory politics. The book undoubtedly challenges many of us who smugly accept American aexceptionalisma in freedom of speech and the press...Krotoszynski helps us appreciate the value of comparative free speech with a new, penetrating perspective.a
--"The Law and Politics Book Review"

The First Amendment --and its guarantee of free speech for all Americans--has been at the center of scholarly and public debate since the birth of the Constitution, and the fervor in which intellectuals, politicians, and ordinary citizens approach the topic shows no sign of abating as the legal boundaries and definitions of free speech are continually evolving and facing new challenges. Such discussions have generally remained within the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution and its American context, but consideration of free speech in other industrial democracies can offer valuable insights into the relationship between free speech and democracy on a larger and more global scale, thereby shedding new light on some unexamined (and untested) assumptions that underlie U.S. free speechdoctrine.

Ronald Krotoszynski compares the First Amendment with free speech law in Japan, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom--countries that are all considered modern democracies but have radically different understandings of what constitutes free speech. Challenging the popular--and largely American--assertion that free speech is inherently necessary for democracy to thrive, Krotoszynski contends that it is very difficult to speak of free speech in universalist terms when the concept is examined from a framework of comparative law that takes cultural difference into full account.

In this edited volume, an array of scholars has examined recent policymaking efforts in selected areas of contemporary importance. Government at Work: Policymaking in the Twenty-First Century Congress provides chapter-length treatment to reveal the similarities and fundamentals of policy development while also illustrating the unique issues and obstacles found in each policy environment. This book's scope spans the entire policymaking process, exposing the readers to the interaction among all major power centers, ranging from interest groups, media, courts, Congress, the president, and the federal bureaucracy. It shows the dynamic nature of American policymaking system. The approach employed in this book treats events, such as Congress passing a law or the Supreme Court announcing a ruling, as important steps in the policy process rather than as merely ends unto themselves. This volume focuses on major legislation passed by Congress since the turn of the century. It features one case study per chapter, demonstrating how issues rise to the national agenda, pass through the congressional labyrinth to become public policies, are implemented by the federal bureaucracy, receive feedback from affected elements of the society, and ultimately evolve over the years.

In a period when the nature and scope of the European internal market is hotly contested, this collection offers a topical analysis of the most pressing issues relating to market integration and public services in the EU. As the debate continues over the balance between state control and market freedom, questions are also raised about the relationship between EU regulation and national policy choices and the 'joint responsibility' of the Union and the Member States.
Outlining the most important current issues relating to market integration and public services in the EU, Market Integration and Public Services in the European Union also addresses the underlying, systemic questions of the relation between public services and markets, and services and the consumer. Chapters also examine the application of state aids and procurement law to public services. The final two chapters focus on two public service sectors where the mix of Treaty rules, case law, and legislation has operated in rather different ways: public service media and health services

Examining the role of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) in the development of the European Union (EU) and the evolution of the EU treaties, this book focuses on the negotiations of what are termed the eight constitutional IGCs. These eight include the negotiations of the 1950s and 1960s on: 1) the European Coal and Steel Community, 2) the European Defence and Political Community, 3) the European Economic Community and European Atomic Energy Community, and 4) the Fouchet Plan. The book also examines the more recent constitutional IGCs on: 1) the Single European Act, 2) the Maastricht Treaty, 3) the Amsterdam Treaty, and 4) the Nice Treaty. This book challenges the neofunctionalist and liberal intergovernmentalist perspectives that have been used in the past to explain the process of IGCs. The author presents an alternative perspective in the form of an incremental model to explain the nature of negotiations at all eight constitutional IGCs. It is also argued that the increasing frequency of IGC negotiations signifies a gradual institutionalisation of the process to the point where the constitutional IGC is becoming a regular feature on the EU's political landscape. Governments are locked into a process of constitutional IGCs that leaves the primary legal document of the EU in a state of perpetual reform. In turn, it is argued that the incrementalism that defines the IGC negotiations shapes the entire process of European integration and the general nature of the European Union.