A Collection of Fascinating Maritime Lawsuits.Reprint of the sole edition."The book contains interesting narratives of out-of-the-way occurrences at sea and of the litigation to which they led." --American Law Review 62 (1928) 159.CONTENTS: Drake at the Suit of Doughty. Sallee Rovers at Winchester. The Battle of New Brighton. The Casting Away of the "Adventure." Neptune as Defendant. The Marooning of Robert Jeffery. The Cruise of the "Pylades."The "Felicidade." An Act of State. The Illeanon Pirates.William Senior [1861-1937] was the author of Doctors' Commons and the Old Court of Admiralty: A Short History of Civilians in England (1922) and The Historyof Maritime Law (1974.)

Through the prism of the U.S. Constitution and other foundational documents, Edd Applegate's Political and Social Changes in the United States will discuss major transformations in American social and political life since the Founding, beginning with England's expansion in North America, the War of Independence, and the early national period. It proceeds through industrialization, the Civil War, economic growth, progressivism, and the emergence of the United States on the world stage. It concludes with considerations of the Cold War and post-Cold War worlds and new threats and challenges to the United States and its institutions.

The impact,and indeed long term survival of the European Community depends to a great extent on the effective practical implementation of Community law. This book compares the role of the Commission and national administrations in supervising and enforcing EC law, paying attention to what powers have been granted and what constraints exist, and when the Commission and national administrations are treated differently, and if that difference is justified. The main object of the book is to analyse the main tools for supervision, such as inspections, and the main infringement procedures. Issues such as deadlines to act, discretion, the capacity of Administrations to cope with their responsibilities in this area, and the problem of administrative coordination, are examined. The author also offers an overview of the system of EC administrative law procedures, which have evolved to prosecute infringements committed by Member States. The author analyses the reasons lying behind the creation of those procedures, and the interaction between them, and focuses on the importance of Article 169. The book relies primarily on an analysis of legislation, case-law and the most relevant legal rules, but also draws on the literature in political science and public management. This analysis is supplemented by the results of questionnaires and interviews with both national and Commission officials comparing their different views.

"Must reading for anyone who seeks a better understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court's role in race relations policy."
--"Choice"

"Beware Those committed to the Supreme Court as the ultimate defender of minority rights should not read Race Against the Court. Through a systematic peeling away of antimajoritarian myth, Spann reveals why the measure of relief the Court grants victims of racial injustice is determined less by the character of harm suffered by blacks than the degree of disadvantage the relief sought will impose on whites. A truly pathbreaking work."
--Derrick Bell

As persuasive as it is bold. Race Against The Court stands as a necessary warning to a generation of progressives who have come to depend on the Supreme Court of the perils of such dependency. It joins with Bruce Ackerman's We, the People and John Brigham's Cult of the Court as the best in contemporary work on the Supreme Court.
--Austin Sarat, William Nelson, Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science, Amherst College

The controversies surrounding the nominations, confirmations, and rejections of recent Supreme Court justices, and the increasingly conservative nature of the Court, have focused attention on the Supreme Court as never before. Although the Supreme Court is commonly understood to be the guardian of minority rights against the tyranny of the majority, Race Against The Court argues that the Court has never successfully performed this function. Rather the actual function of the Court has been to perpetuate the subordination of racial minorities by operating as an undetected agent of majoritarian preferences in the political preferences. In this provocative, controversial, and timely work, Girardeau Spann illustrates how the selection process for Supreme Court justices ensures that they will share the political preferences of the elite majority that runs the nation. Customary safeguards that are designed to protect the judicial process from majoritarian predispositions, Spann contends, cannot successfully insulate judicial decisionmaking from the pervasive societal pressures that exist to discount racial minority interests.

The case most often cited as the icon of Court sensitivity to minority rights, Brown v. Board of Education, has more recently served to lull minorities into believing that efforts at political self-determination are futile, fostering a seductive dependence and overreliance on the Court as the caretaker of minority rights. Race Against The Court demonstrates how the Court has centralized the law of affirmative action in a way that stymies minority efforts for meaningful political and economic gain and how it has legitimated the legal status quo in a way that causes minorities never even to question the inevitability of their subordinate social status.

Spann contends that racial minorities would be better off seeking to advance their interests in the pluralist political process and proposes a novel strategy for minorities to pursue in order to extricate themselves from the seemingly inescapable grasp of Supreme Court protection. Certain to generate lively, heated debate, "Race Against The Court" exposes the veiled majoritarianism of the Supreme Court and the dangers of allowing the Court to formulate our national racial policy.

From wiretapping American citizens to waterboarding foreign prisoners, the Bush administration has triggered an uproar over its tactics in the War on Terror-and over its justifications for using them. Through a close study of the legal advice provided to President Bush, former Justice Department attorney Harold Bruff provides an incisive and scathing critique of those justifications, which he finds at odds with both American law and moral authority.

Bruff rigorously examines legal opinions regarding NSA surveillance, the indefinite detention of terror suspects, the denial of Geneva Convention protection, trial by military commissions, and suspect interrogation techniques. He shows that Bush's claims of executive power exceed anything found in U.S. history or judicial precedent, that clear statutory limitations were treated with contempt, and that Bush and his lawyers strove to exclude both congressional and judicial participation in setting antiterrorist policy.

Bruff dissects the legal underpinnings employed by John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, and others to defend an inflated view of presidential power, showing how they combined ideology, policy advocacy, and selective readings of legal precedent to bolster executive actions. Most important, he brings into sharp focus legitimate counterarguments from the State Department, the Pentagon, and the Office of Legal Counsel that challenged or refuted these legally suspect views and yet were largely ignored or even ridiculed by the president's advisers. Offering contrasts with the legal advice provided previous presidents, he also reviews the fundamental constitutional limits on executive action and the principles of professional responsibility that govern lawyers when they counsel government clients.

As Bruff observes, bad advice to presidents is never in short supply, but legal advice should be objective and reliable. His book points up the urgent need for advisers to serve both the president and the nation by finding a middle ground between limiting presidential power and allowing it the flexibility it needs to respond to crises. Both highly readable and authoritative, it is a must for legal scholars and an eye-opener for every citizen concerned with preserving our nation's commitment to the rule of law.

An in-depth examination of the relationship between gay rights, public opinion, and legislation since the late 1800s. In this comprehensive overview of how the American legal system has approached issues pertaining to sexual orientation and how the law has advanced-or hindered-civil rights, author Lee Walzer reveals that while the United States has the world's most developed lesbian and gay community, it lags other countries on equality for sexual minorities. Gay Rights on Trial focuses on four significant cases that have shaped the development of gay rights, including detailed discussion of majority and dissenting decisions and analysis of their legacy and impact. Also included are a chronology; a section of key people, laws, and concepts; a table of cases; key legal documents such as the Defense of Marriage Act and the Vermont Civil Union Act; and an annotated bibliography. Introductory essay covers issues from the changing notions of morality and the law to the various sides in gay rights disputes Contains edited excerpts of key legal documents such as Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), in which the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting homosexual conduct

This book provides insights into the viability of the idea of global constitution. Global constitutionalism has emerged as an alternative paradigm for international law. However, in view of the complex and varied structure of contemporary constitutionalism, in reality it is extremely difficult to use constitutional law to provide a new paradigm for international law. The book argues that the cultural paradigm can offer functional tools for the global constitutionalism discourse. In other words, global constitutionalism could be handled in the context of a global "constitutional culture" instead of a global constitution. This would provide a more realistic basis for discussing global constitutionalization of a society as diverse as the international community, where a globalized polity and a globalized legal system have not yet been achieved.

Every woman in the world has the right to control her own body, plan her family, receive good quality medical care, and give birth to a healthy baby. This book takes a comprehensive look at the status of women's reproductive rights from a transnational, human-rights perspective. "Reproductive justice" is a relatively new term that underscores the fact that the existence of reproductive rights does not mean that women are able to exercise those rights. For women unable to exercise their rights for any number of reasons-a lack of available services where they live, lack of money or health insurance to pay for services, being forbidden by family members to seek services-the reality is they have no choices to make and possess little if any control over their own bodies, regardless of what the government states their "rights" are. Reproductive Justice: A Global Concern provides a comprehensive and integrated examination of the status of reproductive rights for the world's women, covering a wide range of reproductive rights issues. Topics include women's rights to determine their own sexuality and choose their own partners, rape, sex trafficking, fertility treatments and other assisted reproductive technologies, contraception and abortion, maternal and infant mortality, postpartum support, and breastfeeding. Contributions from 25 distinguished international scholars with research, practice, and public policy expertise on reproductive rights Bibliography with each chapter Concluding chapter on international public policy

In June of 1972, the Democratic National Party headquarters in Washington, D.C., was the site of one of the most famous burglaries in U.S. history. The abortive Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up is reexamined in this book from the unique perspective of the Supreme Court judges, who grappled with its political and legal ramifications. Howard Ball presents the litigation in the U.S. vs. Nixon case from the inside out, analyzing the constitutional issues that faced the court and the way in which the justices worked to resolve conflicts, overcome obstacles, and arrive at an institutional opinion. In recounting the tragedy of Watergate from the viewpoint of the judges, the book makes use of a number of important original sources, including interviews and letters from the justices. Perhaps most important in telling this story, though, are the conference notes and docket sheets of the Court members, especially those of Justices William J. Brennan, Jr., and William O. Douglas. To set the Watergate tapes litigation against the proper background, Ball also examines the role of the federal judiciary in the political system, the crucial concept of judicial review, and the Supreme Court's processes and personnel at the time of the litigation. A selected bibliography and comprehensive index conclude the work. As a unique chronicle of the Watergate scandal, this book will be a valuable resource for courses in American history, legal studies, and the Supreme Court, as well as a significant addition to academic, legal, and public libraries.

Church-state relations are becoming more and more critical. Deepening controversies over church-state relations, the increasing religious pluralism of American society, and the changing makeup of the Supreme Court are forcing a rethinking of approaches to church and state in the public policy realm. Stephen Monsma offers a new approach rooted in structural pluralism as a normative way to understand church-state relations. He suggests that the government should use a principle of positive neutrality in handling church-state relations. He integrates historical, theoretical, social, and legal perspectives and writes in a lively manner for interdisciplinary audiences of students, scholars, and general readers. This study provides an historical background of church and state relations in American society and discusses the development of church-state theory and practice. The author argues that confusions today can be traced back to flaws in the disestablishment settlement of the eighteenth century, flaws which have come to light in the twentieth century. He looks at this pluralist society and the concept of positive neutrality and of religious freedom historically and theoretically and then applies his approach to current issues relating to national policy and Supreme Court decision-making.

Lopeman examines the impact advocacy of intentional judicial activism by a justice of a state supreme court can have on establishing the court as a policy maker. He examines the attitudinal model and the judicial role model of decision making and concludes that, while the attitudinal model might describe the decision-making process in the U.S. Supreme Court, the judicial role model better describes decision making in state supreme courts. This judicial role model allows the activist to transform a court into a policy maker.

The traditions, recent history, and biographies of recent justices of the Indiana, West Virginia, and Ohio courts are examined to establish a significant relationship between the presence of an activist advocate justice and active policy making by the courts. These courts' decisions in cases with policy making potential are contrasted with decisions in similar cases of three state supreme courts that did not have an advocate justice. Lopeman argues that the presence of an activist advocate explains a court's transformation to active policy making, and that other apparent explanations are insufficient. He emphasizes that the motives of an activist advocate are likely to determine the permanence of policy making in the court. This volume is an important resource for political scientists, legal scholars, and other researchers involved with judicial decision making, state politics, and state constitutional law.

This is the first major treatment of the conflict of laws within the UK, a subject often dealt with only incidentally in the main texts on private international law. In particular, the book examines the effect of the UK's changing constitutional arrangements on questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and issues of recognition and enforcement which arise within the UK.
The book offers practical guidance on the applicable rules in intra-UK conflicts situations with sections devoted to forum shopping within the UK, and other procedural matters. A chapter is also included on the impact of EU legislation on intra-UK conflicts, concluding with a discussion on how "Europeanization" might affect the conflict of laws in the UK. There is also coverage of how public policy functions in the conflict of laws. The book's approach to the treatment of intra-UK conflicts is enhanced by a comparative analysis of the recent response of Canada and Australia to, respectively, interprovincial and interstate conflicts.

This book is a topical study of populist constitutionalism and illiberal democracies,exploring their roots in constitutional imagination as well as their normativeentrenchment and performance in political reality. It provides insightful analysis ofrepublican constitutionalism, focusing on the role of people in radical democracyand revolutionary constitutional reform. Furthermore, the outlook, adequacyand performance of constitutional principles in times of democratic ruptures areassessed. The contributors examine the rise of populist constitutionalism and themain trends that have led to the current, ongoing crises in liberal democracy. Thebook includes original analyses of populist constitutionalism from the viewpointof emotions and constitutional imagination, as well as a special chapter devotedto the challenges posed to constitutional democracy by COVID-19. Combiningtheoretical contributions, comparative typologies and important case studies, thespread of populism and illiberal democracy in Europe is critically explored.Populist Constitutionalism and Illiberal Democracies is a timely contribution to thelively discussion surrounding constitutional law, comparative constitutional law,comparative constitutionalism and political science regarding the rise and spreadof illiberal democracies, authoritarian political regimes and revolutionary, radicaldemocratic and populist constitutionalism.

For some, he was "America's leading smut king," hauled into court repeatedly over thirty years for peddling obscene publications through the mail. But when Samuel Roth appealed a 1956 conviction, he forced the Supreme Court to finally come to grips with a problem that had plagued both American society and constitutional law for longer than he had been in business. For while the facts of "Roth v. United States" were unexceptional, its constitutional issues would define the relationship of obscenity to the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision in "Roth" for the first time tried to definitively rule on the issue of obscenity in American life and law--and failed. In this first book-length examination of the case, Whitney Strub lays out the history of obscenity's meaning as a legal concept, highlights the influence of antivice crusaders like Anthony Comstock and John Sumner, and chronicles the shadowy career that led Roth to spend nearly a decade of his life imprisoned for the allegedly obscene materials that he sent through the mails. Strub then unwraps the events that produced "Roth v. United States," placing the trial in the context of its times--the Kinsey Reports, the Kefauver hearings, free speech debates--by using Roth's own private papers along with the records of the various prosecutions and the memos of the justices.

The significance of "Roth," as Strub reveals, lay in the two faces of Justice William Brennan's majority opinion--which on the one hand reflected the liberalizing attitude toward sexual matters in mid-century America, but on the other kept "obscene" expressions beyond First Amendment protection. Because that ruling points up the contradictions of a society where the prurient and repressive commingle uncomfortably, Strub shows how Roth says much more about American sexual values than Brennan's written words necessarily acknowledged.

In our era of internet pornography and "Fifty Shades of Grey," it may be difficult to imagine a time when obscenity was a matter for the courts. As Strub tracks the legacy of "Roth" and obscenity law through the ongoing policing of acceptable sexuality into the twenty-first century, his riveting narrative brings those times to life and helps readers navigate the fine line between what is socially acceptable and what is criminally obscene.

An introductory survey of the government's role in America's continuing drive for equality. Today's lingering inequalities, particularly the "American dilemma" of racism, runs throughout U.S. history. Equal Protection provides readers with a historical overview of the controversies over the issue of equality, an understanding of how government-and, particularly, the courts and Congress-has reacted to these controversies, and the role these issues have played in shaping U.S. society. This volume follows the push for equal treatment regardless of age, gender, disabilities, economic status, or sexual orientation. It focuses on legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, and political initiatives and movements such as The Great Society, the ERA, and the War on Poverty. Here are American's interpretations of equal rights, then and now. Includes a section of A-Z entries covering people, laws, events, judicial decisions, statutes, and concepts related to equal protection in the United States Primary source documents include court decisions, executive orders, and legislation that shaped the status of equal protection in our society today

In this set of essays,public lawyers, property lawyers and legal philosophers examine the public dimensions of private property. At a time when governments across the globe are privatising formerly public property, the public forum is being replaced by the privately owned shopping mall, and an increasing range of interests are being described as 'property', an examination of the powers which attach to ownership becomes all the more pressing. The contributors consider whether property is a human right, its role in making responsible citizens, its relationship to freedom of speech and other values, the proper scope of constitutional protections of private property, impediments to the redistribution of property, and attempts to redress historical wrongs by property settlements to indigenous people. Taking a richly comparative perspective, examples have been drawn from jurisdictions as diverse as the United Kingdom, South Africa, Germany, the United States, and New Zealand. Contributors: Janet McLean (ed), Kevin Gray, Susan Francis Gray, Geoffrey Samuel, J W Harris, Gregory Alexander, Andre van der Walt, Tom Allen, Jeremy Waldron, Maurice Goldsmith, Alex Frame, John Dawson, Michael Robertson.

Constitutional Torts and the War on Terror examines the judicial response to human rights claims arising from the Bush Administration's war on terror. Despite widespread agreement that the Administration's program of extraordinary rendition, prolonged detention, and "enhanced" interrogation was torture by another name, not a single federal appellate court has confirmed an award of damages to the program's victims. The silence of the federal courts leaves victims without redress and the constitutional limits on government action undefined. Many of the suits seeking redress have been based on the landmark 1971 Supreme Court decision in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. This book traces the history of common law accountability, the rise of Bivens claims, and the post-Bivens history of constitutional tort litigation. After evaluating the failure of Bivens litigation arising from the war on terror, the book considers and rejects the arguments that have been put forward to explain and justify judicial silence. The book provides the Supreme Court with the tools needed to rethink its Bivens jurisprudence. Rather than treating the overseas national security context as disabling, modern federal courts should take a page from the nineteenth century, presume the viability of tort litigation, and proceed to the merits. Only by doing so can the federal courts ensure redress for victims and prevent future Administrations from using torture as an instrument of official policy.