Drawing upon law, politics, sociology, and gender studies, this volume explores the ways in which the Muslim body is stereotyped, interrogated, appropriated and demonized in Western societies and subject to counter-terror legislation and the suspension of human rights. The author examines the intense scrutiny of Muslim women's dress and appearance, and their experience of hate crimes, as well as how Muslim men's bodies are emasculated, effeminized and subjected to torture. Chapters explore a range of issues including Western legislation and foreign policy against the 'Other', orientalism, Islamophobia, masculinity, the intersection of gender with nationalism and questions about diversity, inclusion, religious freedom, citizenship and identity. This text will be of interest to scholars and students across a range of disciplines, including sociology, gender studies, law, politics, cultural studies, international relations, and human rights.

Since at least the time of Justinian—under statutes, codes of judicial ethics, and the common law—judges have been expected to recuse themselves from cases in which they might have a stake. Thesame holds true for the justices of the US Supreme Court. For instance, there were calls for Ruth Bader Ginsburg and ElenaKagan, both of whom had officiated at gay weddings, to recuse themselves from the recent marriage equality case, Obergefell v.Hodges. Even a case like this, where no justice bowed out, reveals what a tricky ethical issue recusal can be. But as Louis J.Virelli demonstrates in this provocative work, recusal at the Supreme Court also presents questions of constitutional power. Disqualifying the High Court shows that our current understanding of how and when justices should recuse themselves is at odds with our constitutional design. Viewing recusal through a constitutional lens, Virelli reveals new and compelling information about how justices should decide recusal questions and, in turn, how our government should function morebroadly. Along the way he traces the roots and development of federal recusal law in America from as early as the Roman Empire up to the present day. The Supreme Court’s unique place at the top of the judicial branch protects the justices from some forms of congressional interference. Virelli argues that constitutional law, in particular the separation of powers, prohibits Congress from regulating the recusal practices of the Supreme Court. Instead thosedecisions must be left to the justices themselves, grounded in principles of due process—assuring parties fair treatment bythe judicial system—and balanced against the justices’ rights to free speech. Along with the clarity it brings to this highly controversial issue, Virelli’s work also offers insight into constitutional problems presented by separation of powers. It will inform our evolving understanding of theory and practice in the American judicialsystem.

If, as many allege, attacking the gap between rich and poor is a form of class warfare, then the struggle against income inequality is the longest running war in American history. To defenders of the status quo, who argue that the accumulation of wealth free of government intervention is an essential feature of the American way, this book offers a forceful answer. While many of those who oppose addressing economic inequality through public policy today do so in the name of freedom, Clement Fatovic demonstrates that concerns about freedom informed the Founding Fathers’ arguments for public policy that tackled economic disparities. Where contemporary arguments against such government efforts conceptualize freedom in economic terms, however, those supporting public policies conducive to greater economic equality invoked a more participatory, republican, conception of freedom. As many of the Founders understood it, economic independence, which requires a wide if imperfect distribution of property, is a precondition of the political independence they so profoundly valued. Fatovic reveals a deep concern among the Founders—including Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Noah Webster—about the impact of economic inequality on political freedom. America’s Founding and the Struggle over Economic Inequality traces this concern through many important political debates in Congress and the broader polity that shaped the early Republic—debates over tax policies, public works, public welfare, and the debt from the Revolution. We see how Alexander Hamilton, so often characterized as a cold-hearted apologist for plutocrats, actually favored a more progressive system of taxation, along with various policies aimed at easing the economic hardship of specific groups. In Thomas Paine, frequently portrayed as an advocate of laissez-faire government, we find a champion of a comprehensive welfare state that would provide old-age pensions, public housing, and a host of other benefits as a matter of “right, not charity.� Contrary to the picture drawn by so many of today’s pundits and politicians, this book shows us how, for the first American statesmen, preventing or minimizing economic disparities was essential to the preservation of the new nation’s freedom and practice of self-government.

How should we proceed with advanced research of humanities and social sciences in collaboration? What are the pressing issues of this new trend in a cataclysmic time for civilization? This book, originated with a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Topic-Setting Program, addresses these challenging questions in four parts for innovating twenty-first-century humanities and social sciences. It broadens the horizon for reviewing multi-disciplinary landscapes of risks and regulation of new technologies by focusing on paradigmatic cases from the fields of life and environment. Here, genome editing for reproductive treatment and renewable energy under the constraint of climate change in Japanese and global contexts are involved. The volume comprises a combination of topics and aspects such as public policy and philosophy of science, medicine and law, climate ethics, and the economics of electricity. This edited collection will thus motivate forward-thinking readers across the diverse spectrum of social sciences and humanities to survey themes of their own interests in multi-disciplinary studies. In so doing, they can explore the evolving frontiers of those disciplines and the depths of individual contributions by experts in philosophy, ethics, law, economics, and science, technology, and society (STS), including bioscience.

This book asks the crucial question of how it came to pass that on the 25 May 2018, the Irish electorate voted by a landslide in favour of changing its abortion legislation that, for the previous thirty-five years, had been one of the most restrictive regimes in Europe. The author shows how, alongside traditional campaigning tactics such as street demonstrations, door-to-door canvassing, and the distribution of pro-choice merchandise and information leaflets, a key strategy of pro-choice advocacy groups was to encourage first-person abortion story-sharing by women in their efforts to repeal the Eighth Amendment, which had effectively banned abortion provision in the country. The book argues that a normalizing of abortion talk took place in the lead-up to the referendum, with women speaking publicly in unprecedented numbers about their abortion histories. These women storytellers were mirroring certain pro-choice movements in other contexts, where a new 'sound it loud, say it proud' narrative around abortion experiences has emerged as a central contemporary strategy for destigmatizing abortion discourse. Students and scholars across a range of disciplines, including law, gender studies, sociology, and human geography, will find this book of interest.

We live in a world in which courts crucially shape public policy through constitutional adjudication. This is a book written for that world. It brings together a group of distinguished scholars from many disciplines to examine the Supreme Court's recent decision that statutes prohibiting doctors from helping their patients commit suicide may be constitutional. It offers a guide to that decision and to the larger issues it raises for citizens and scholars alike. It asks everyone's first question: What does the decision mean for today and tomorrow? It asks the lawyer's question: Is the Supreme Court's reasoning clear and convincing? It asks the doctor's question: How will the decision affect the decisions physicians make with their patients? It asks the ethicist's question: Will the decision conduce to wise and just decisions at the end of life? It asks the historian's question: How are we to understand the Court's work in light of our disturbing national experience with euthanasia? Ultimately, it asks the questions citizens need to ask in our new world: Is constitutional adjudication a good way to make public policy? Are courts well equipped--with experience, with doctrine, with wisdom--to make good policy? What role should courts have in making policy in a democracy? Has the Supreme Court made good public policy? What is the right policy for law at the end of life?
Carl Schneider is Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School.

When it adopted a new constitution in 1969, the Seminole Nation was the first of the Five Tribes in Oklahoma to formally reorganize its government. In the face of an American legal system that sought either to destroy its nationhood or to impede its self-government, the Seminole Nation tenaciously retained its internal autonomy, cultural vitality, and economic subsistence. Here, L. Susan Work draws on her experience as a tribal attorney to present the first legal history of the twentieth-century Seminole Nation.

Work traces the Seminoles' story from their removal to Indian Territory from Florida in the late nineteenth century to the new challenges of the twenty-first century. She also places the history of the Seminole Nation within the context of general Indian law and policy, thereby revealing common threads in the legal struggles and achievements of the Five Tribes, including their evolving relationships with both federal and state governments.

As Work amply demonstrates, the history of the Seminole Nation is one of survival and rebirth. It is a dramatic story of an Indian nation overcoming formidable obstacles to move forward into the twenty-first century as a thriving sovereign nation.

Proverbs from various African countries, arranged according to theme.

Although freedom of speech is regarded as a bedrock principle of American constitutionalism, the Supreme Court did not recognize it as a fundamental right worthy of strong constitutional protection until the middle of the 20th century. This work focuses on the core doctrines that constitute free speech jurisprudence. It provides a historical evolution of the doctrine and examines the key Supreme Court decisions affecting it.

This volume gives readers an analytical framework for understanding free speech jurisprudence. It takes a fresh approach to free speech methodology by breaking it into two accessible parts: substantive doctrines and procedural doctrines. This work includes informative background chapters on the history and theory of free expression. It also looks at the Supreme Court's struggle with subversive advocacy and its importance in protecting free speech.