Comparative Constitutional Studies takes a rich area of research and teaching and makes it attractive for the classroom setting and beyond. Every constitution has an interesting story to tell, and for this book Gunter Frankenberg has selected vibrant examples that encourage readers to practise realism, demonstrate critical spirit and examine the dark side of framers' reports and normative theories. This book deals with textbook hegemons, made in Philadelphia, Tokyo, Paris and, more importantly, with other constitutions from the global south, often classified as also-ran. Constitutions reflect conflicts and experiences, political visions and anxieties, ideals and ideologies, and Frankenberg's interdisciplinary approach serves as an excellent introduction to a new transnational conversation in comparative constitutional law. Its fresh perspective will make this book as an excellent resource for scholars and students of comparative constitutional law, political science, sociology, and anthropology.

An excellent sampling of current thinking in the theory and practice of constitutionalism. Each essay was written specifically for this volume by well-known legal and political philosophers. . . . All in all, a first-rate and provocative example of contemporary philosophical concerns. Choice In our constitutional democracy, the dissent and conflict that are the inevitable consequence of free political dialogue point to the importance of reexamining the philosophical premises on which our conceptions of society and government are based. This volume of original essays reviews the foundations of constitutionalism in classical liberal thought and looks at contemporary philosophical perspectives on a wide range of constitutional issues. Written by a distinguished group of philosophers and constitutional scholars, it provides a deeper understanding of the U.S. Constitution as a political instrument and examines the idea of constitutionalism as it functions in our modern world.

In recent years, countries around the world introduced numerous national security programs and military campaigns. Despite the complex legal questions they raise, very few of these measures have been the subject of rigorous judicial review. Nevertheless, the absence of real-time review has had an enormous effect on human rights, rule of law, and on national security. The Supreme Court of Israel provides an excellent case study of a different approach, which allows judges to assess military action in real-time and to issue non-binding results of their evaluation. This raises the question: How was the Court actually able to uphold this challenge? In Judicial Review of National Security, David Scharia explains how the Supreme Court of Israel developed unconventional judicial review tools and practices that allowed it to provide judicial guidance to the Executive in real-time. In this book, he argues that courts could play a much more dominant role in reviewing national security, and demonstrates the importance of intensive real-time inter-branch dialogue with the Executive, as a tool used by the Israeli Court to provide such review. This book aims to show that if one Supreme Court was able to provide rigorous judicial review of national security in real-time, then we should reconsider the conventional wisdom regarding the limits of judicial review of national security.

Evicted! is a practical and critical look at the vulnerability of Americans' property rights to eminent domain abuse since the Supreme Court's 2005 Kelo decision. The 2005 Supreme Court decision Kelo v. City of New London, which upheld the taking of an individual's home by local government for the sake of private development, unleashed a firestorm of controversy. The backlash against eminent domain cuts across partisan, ideological, and racial lines, with 4 out of 5 Americans opposing Kelo. Critics of Kelo claim that it represents a radical departure in the law, putting every homeowner in jeopardy of dispossession by government at the service of corporate interests. But are property rights and eminent domain truly in mortal conflict? Written for general readers, property owners, and local government officials seeking to understand the implications of Kelo for eminent domain and property law, Evicted! cuts through all the hype and hysteria surrounding Kelo and argues that the alleged wave of eminent domain abuse is mostly a myth. Evicted! describes what property rights are, why the law protects them, and how eminent domain really works. Schultz shows that Kelo did not make new law but only broadened Supreme Court precedents, and he refutes claims that Kelo has opened the way to widespread eminent domain abuse. Nevertheless, the author identifies certain legislative changes that are needed at the local, state, and national levels to better protect individual property owners when corporate thugs and corrupt government officials occasionally gang up against them.

In this widely acclaimed landmark study, Joan Hoff illustrates how women remain second- class citizens under the current legal system and questions whether the continued pursuit of equality based on a one-size-fits-all vision of traditional individual rights is really what will most improve conditions for women in America as they prepare for the twenty-first century. Concluding that equality based on liberal male ideology is no longer an adequate framework for improving women's legal status, Hoff's highly original and incisive volume calls for a demystification of legal doctrine and a reinterpretation of legal texts (including the Constitution) to create a feminist jurisprudence.

In the public law area, there is an understanding that judicial decision making is not always objective, that the courts are not constrained by the law and the facts of the case, and that courts are actually policy makers influenced by extraneous factors that have little to do the legal and factual matters of a case. Through a combination of an integrative review of the relevant literature in the public law area and new case studies researched by the author, Barbara Yarnold argues that the public law area has discarded the traditional view of the judiciary as a passive interpreter of the law who truly weigh the facts of each case. She examines political and environmental variables that have been used to explain judicial outcomes and develops an original general theory of public law explaining under what circumstances political variables impact court decisions, and when region, as an environmental variable, is related to judicial outcomes. The central question in this study is When exactly do the law and the facts count? As Yarnold's analyses of the judicial decision field draw variables from political science, economics, psychology, and criminal justice, among other fields, this work also suggests that the public law area is multidisciplinary in nature. The book concludes with a case study examination of interest groups involved in asylum-related appeals and their role in the Sanctuary Movement. Students and scholars of public administration, law and society, and public law will find Yarnold's integration of research and current literature toward a general theory of public law highly provocative and interesting.

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

Leadership on the Federal Bench: The Craft and Activism of Jack Weinstein considers the ways a particularly gifted federal judge seized the opportunities available to district judges to influence the results of the cases before him, and employed the tools available to him to make policy having a national impact. In the book, author Jeffrey Morris considers the ways in which the judge, Jack Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York, has been limited by his position. This book adds to the slim literature about the policy-making role of district judges applying the work of legal historians, political scientists and those trained in the law. Focusing upon an admitted judicial activist - perhaps the most famous, innovative and controversial district judge sitting today - the book permits a close look at activism at the trial level.
Leadership on the Federal Bench: The Craft and Activism of Jack Weinsteinbegins by analyzing the job of a federal district judge and why it is profitable to study Judge Weinstein. Related topics include Weinstein's background before appointment to the bench; the political and legal environment within which Weinstein has judged and the characteristics of the district in which he sat and its possible impact on him. Part of the book focuses on Weinstein's judicial output for each of his four decades on the bench. Cases are drawn from a diverse number of areas, among them the areas of civil rights, freedom of speech, search and seizures, organized crime and political corruption cases, evidence and procedure. Finally, conclusions are made on the role of district courts, judicial activism in general, along with a summary of Judge Weinstein's career.

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

Contributing to the literature on comparative criminal procedure and Latin American law, this book examines the effects of adversarial criminal justice reforms on victim's rights by specifically analyzing the Colombian criminal justice reform of the early 2000s. This research focuses on the production, interpretation, and implementation of rules and institutions by exploring how different actors have employed the concept of victims and victims' rights to promote their agendas in the context of criminal justice reforms. It also analyzes how the goals of these agendas have interplayed in practice. By the early 2000s, it seemed that the Colombian criminal justice system was headed towards a process characterized by broader victim participation, primarily because of the doctrine of the Constitutional Court on victims' rights. But in 2002, the Colombian Attorney General promoted a more adversarial criminal justice reform. This book argues that this reform represented a sudden and unpredicted reversal of the Constitutional Court's doctrine on victim participation, even though one of the central justifications for the reform was the need to satisfy human rights standards and adhere to the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court on victims' rights. In the criminal justice reform of the early 2000s and its subsequent modifications, the promotion of a dichotomous interpretation of the adversarial model-which conceived the criminal process as a competition between prosecution and defense-served to limit victim participation. This study examines how conceptions of victims' rights emerged out of the struggles between different and at times competing agendas. In the Colombian process of reform, victims' rights have been invoked both as a justification for criminal sanctions and as an explanation for crime prevention and restorative justice. After assessing quantitative and qualitative data, this book concludes that punitive approaches to victims' rights have prevailed over restorative justice perspectives. Furthermore, it argues that punitiveness in the criminal justice system has not resulted in more protection for victims. Ultimately, this research reveals that the adversarial criminal justice reform of the early 2000s has not substantially improved the protection of victims' rights in Colombia.

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.)

This work examines the experiences of African Americans under the law and how African American culture has fostered a rich tradition of legal criticism. Moving between novels, music, and visual culture, the essays present race as a significant factor within legal discourse. Essays examine rights and sovereignty, violence and the law, and cultural ownership through the lens of African American culture. The volume argues that law must understand the effects of particular decisions and doctrines on African American life and culture and explores the ways in which African American cultural production has been largely centered on a critique of law.

This reference work compares the formation of contract in the legal systems of England, France, Iran and other Islamic systems. The preliminary part gives a historical sketch and describes the sources of law for the four legal systems and then describes the development and general theory of contract law in the four systems. Part one then analyzes in detail the basic notions of formation of contract including the range of psychological elements and their means of expression. The author goes on to describe and compare the function and determination of offer and acceptance in the four legal systems. Part two analyzes the mechanism of formation of import of a contract in respect of both offer and acceptance. The book has been extensively researched and includes references to Roman law and other modern legal systems. The work has been indexed and cross-referenced.

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.

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.

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.

"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.