Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon's political partnership changed the face of Scotland, bringing the country to within 200,000 votes of independence and holding sway at Holyrood for more than a decade. So how and why has their thirty-year alliance irretrievably broken down? Break-Up tells the inside story of how the once unbreakable unity of the Scottish National Party was ripped apart amid shocking claims of sexual assault. With unrivalled access to both camps and the women who made the allegations, and with rigorously fair-minded reporting, journalists David Clegg and Kieran Andrews go behind the headlines to uncover the truth about this extraordinary episode, in a piece of political history that reads like a thriller. Now fully updated, this is a jaw-dropping tale of inappropriate behaviour in the highest reaches of power, of lies, distrust and alleged conspiracy, with profound implications not only for Salmond and Sturgeon themselves but for Scotland's governing party and the wider independence campaign.

The issue of electoral reform has divided the Labour Party since its inception, but only for a brief period in the early 20th century has the Party been committed to reforming first-past-the-post (FPTP). Now, having suffered four successive general election defeats, the Labour Party will have to reconsider its electoral strategy if it is, once again, to become a party of government. For some, a commitment to electoral reform is an indispensable step to widen support, transform the Party, and unlock British Politics. For others, the present system still offers the best hope of majority Labour governments, avoiding deals with the Party's rivals and the watering down of Labour's social democratic agenda. This book explores the Labour Party's approaches towards reforming the Westminster electoral system, and more widely, its perception of electoral pacts and coalition government. The opening chapters chart the debate from the inception of the Party up to the electoral and political impact of Thatcherism. From there, the book takes a closer look at significant recent events, including the Plant Report, the Jenkins Commission, the end of New Labour, the Alternative Vote Referendum, and closing with the Labour leadership containing the matter at Party Conference, 2021. Importantly, it offers an assessment of the pressures and environment in which Labour politicians have operated. Extensive elite-level interviews and new archival research offers the reader a comprehensive and definitive account of this debate.

Many democratic theorists have viewed the recent innovations adopted throughout Latin America in a positive light. This evaluation has engendered the idea that all innovations are democratic and all democratic innovations are able to foster citizenship. Presenting a realistic analysis of both the positive and negative aspects of innovation, this book argues that these innovations ought to be examined at the intersection between design and the political system. The Two Faces of Institutional Innovation offers a new perspective on developments such as participatory budgeting, the National Electoral Institute (INE) and the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) in Mexico and comites de vigilancia in Bolivia, and evaluates the extent to which, in reality, citizens were involved in decision-making, distributive policies and citizen education. Further chapters also examine the expansion of innovation to the field of judicial institutions - one of the key areas in which innovation took place in Latin America, showing that the role of legal corporations in democracy cannot be compared with the role of engaged citizens. Contemporary and astute, this book will captivate students and scholars researching in the areas of innovation policy and regulatory governance. Its analysis of the positive and negative aspects of democratic innovation will also benefit democratic theorists and policy-makers alike.

Over the course of its history, the United States Supreme Court has emerged as the most powerful judiciary unit the world has ever seen. Paul D. Moreno's How the Court Became Supreme offers a deep dive into its transformation from an institution paid little notice by the American public to one whose decisions are analyzed and broadcast by major media outlets across the nation. The Court is supreme today not just within the judicial branch of the federal government but also over the legislative and executive branches, effectively possessing the ability to police elections and choose presidents. Before 1987, nearly all nominees to the Court sailed through confirmation hearings, often with little fanfare, but these nominations have now become pivotal moments in the minds of voters. Complaints of judicial primacy range across the modern political spectrum, but little attention is given to what precisely that means or how it happened. What led to the ascendancy of America's highest court? Moreno seeks to answer this question, tracing the long history of the Court's expansion of influence and examining how the Court envisioned by the country's Founders has evolved into an imperial judiciary. The US Constitution contains a multitude of safeguards to prevent judicial overreach, but while those measures remain in place today, most have fallen into disuse. Many observers maintain that the Court exercises legislative or executive power under the guise of judicial review, harming rather than bolstering constitutional democracy. How the Court Became Supreme tells the story of the origin and development of this problem, proposing solutions that might compel the Court to embrace its more traditional role in our constitutional republic.

Judge Baltasar Garzon achieved international prestige in 1998 when he pursued the perpetrators of crimes committed in Argentina against Spanish citizens and began proceedings for the arrest of the Chilean ex-dictator Augusto Pinochet. But when he transferred his attention to his Spanish homeland he was put on trial for opening an investigation into crimes committed by Francoists. As result he now (February 2012) finds himself on the point of being expelled from the judiciary. ... The Garzon case is neither so absurd nor so difficult to understand if the record of the Spanish judiciary is examined through the prism of a series of representative cases since the transition to democracy. Key is the way the judiciary has dealt with those who have investigated cases of people murdered by the military rebels from July 1936 onwards. Shoot the Messenger? relates thirteen judicial cases that took place between 1981 and 2012. They range from the banning of the documentary film Rocio by Fernando Ruiz Vergara, because it named the person responsible for one of the massacres in southwest Spain, to the recent trial of Judge Garzon. The judicial outcome in each case reflected the prejudices and ideology of the judge in charge. ... The Francoist repression still constitutes a dead weight in Spanish politics as heavy as the gravestone that covers the remains of the dictator in the Valle de los Caidos. The nature of the transition from autocracy to democracy has made it difficult to overcome a black past that not even the post-Franco democratic governments -- Rodriguez Zapatero's "memory" policy included -- have dared confront. The potential defrocking of Judge Garzon puts the Spanish polity/judiciary back in the realm of Franco's end-of-year message on December 30, 1969, with what became the nautical catch-phrase of his twilight years, "all is lashed down and well lashed down" (todo ha quedado atado, y bien atado).

In 1787. . .
We were given the right to practice the religion of our choice.
We were given the right to say what we wanted without persecution.
It was written that our house and property were secure from unreasonable search and seizure. We were given the right to a public trial.
Fifty-five men we will never know sat in a sweltering room and fought for us.
We were given our rights as citizens of the United States.
Every second fall, as we return again to the ballot box to decide the course of our country's leadership, every voter must find their way back to that room in Philadelphia. Welcome Books is proud to provide a map.
The Constitution of the United States of America, inscribed and illustrated by the master calligrapher, Sam Fink, brings to life the issues underlying the triumphs of this abiding document. Originally published in pen and ink for Random House in 1987, Mr. Fink has gone back to his original black-and-white art and painted it anew, created a full-color masterpiece. The result is glorious. Each amendment, each article, each word so thoughtfully placed in The Constitution has been given Mr. Fink's profound touch. With a powerful intelligence and a wonderful sense of humor, he has provided us with an entry point into this complex document, allowing us to read it with greater ease and understanding.
As well as a trade edition, Welcome Books is honored to present a full-color limited edition of 64 loose folios, each 15" x 22," exquisitely designed and produced--matching in its manufacture the stunning quality of Mr. Fink's ambition and the gravitas of the original document.
In 1787, we were entrusted with our most important living document, The Constitution of the United States of America. Have we kept it safe? To answer this, we must begin by reading it, each and every one of us--so that we may claim our own intimate knowledge of its content; so that we may never forget its tenets; so that we may remember the kind of world we want to live in. This, Sam Fink, in his direct and unadorned way, respectful and loving, helps us do.

Historians have long been engaged in telling the story of the struggle for the vote. In the wake of recent contested elections, the suppression of the vote has returned to the headlines, as awareness of the deep structural barriers to the ballot, particularly for poor, black, and Latino voters, has called attention to the historical roots of issues related to voting access. Perhaps most notably, former state legislator Stacey Abrams's campaign for Georgia's gubernatorial race drew national attention after she narrowly lost to then-secretary of state Brian Kemp, who had removed hundreds of thousands of voters from the official rolls. After her loss, Abrams created Fair Fight, a multimillion-dollar initiative to combat voter suppression in twenty states. At an annual conference of the Organization of American Historians, leading scholars Carol Anderson, Kevin M. Kruse, Heather Cox Richardson, and Heather Anne Thompson had a conversation with Abrams about the long history of voter suppression at the Library Company of Philadelphia. This book is a transcript of that extraordinary conversation, edited by Jim Downs. Voter Suppression in U.S. Elections offers an enlightening, history-informed conversation about voter disenfranchisement in the United States. By gathering scholars and activists whose work has provided sharp analyses of this issue, we see how historians in general explore contentious topics and provide historical context for students and the broader public. The book also includes a "top ten" selection of essays and articles by such writers as journalist Ari Berman, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David Blight, and civil rights icon John Lewis.

Recent U.S. elections have defied nationwide majority preference at the White House, Senate, and House levels. This work of interdisciplinary scholarship explains how ''winner-take-all'' and single-member district elections make this happen, and what can be done to repair the system. Proposed reforms include the National Popular Vote interstate compact (presidential elections); eliminating the Senate filibuster; and proportional representation using Ranked Choice Voting for House, state, and local elections. This timely analysis of election law and politics outlining key structural election reforms combines distinct analysis of presidential, Senate, and U.S. House elections reforms, while also addressing reforms at the state and local government level. The author argues for fundamental structural changes to U.S. elections like Proportional Representation and Ranked Choice Voting, without requiring any constitutional amendments. Analysis of recent political developments such as progress on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, the adoption of Ranked Choice Voting state-wide in Maine, and the 2018 Supreme Court gerrymandering cases add real-world relevance and applicability. This sharp examination of a flawed system is vital reading for students and scholars involved in election law and political science, and is approachable enough for lay readers interested in politics and reform as well. 'Rethinking US Election Law is a timely, well-written argument in favour of electoral reform in the United States. It advances achievable solutions that could go a long way towards solving the country's current democratic breakdown, and is an excellent read for anyone interested in ''unskewing the system''.' - Erica Frazier, LSE Review 'Steven Mulroy's Rethinking US Election Law is a concise and refreshing book on US election law. The book takes the reader on a tour through the various and profound shortcomings of the country's reliance on single-member districts (SMDs) and demonstrates that, so long as these SMDs remain the principal building block of US elections, little can be done to resolve the many ailments that afflict the process. It is a powerful, thoughtfully-reasoned and clearly-written argument in favor of electoral reform.. . . Mulroy offers a compelling argument for electoral reform that should be required reading for the next redistricting cycle or for any undergraduate class on voting rights and redistricting. Even the most skeptical critic would have difficulty refuting his analysis.' - American Political Science Association 'Exceptionally well written, organized and presented, Rethinking US Election Law is a seminal work of outstanding scholarship that is as thoughtful as it is thought-provoking. . . (it) is an especially and unreservedly recommended addition to community, academic, governmental Contemporary Political Science collections and supplemental studies reading lists for students, academia, political activists, and non-specialist general readers with an interest in the subject.' - John Taylor, Midwest Book Review