![]() |
![]() |
Your cart is empty |
||
Showing 1 - 1 of 1 matches in All Departments
For most Americans, habeas corpus is the cornerstone of our legal
system: the principal constitutional check on arbitrary government
power, allowing an arrested person to challenge the legality of his
detention. In a study that could not be more timely, Justin Wert
reexamines this essential individual right and shows that habeas
corpus is not necessarily the check that we've assumed. Habeas
corpus, it emerges, is as much a tool of politics as it is of law.
Tracing the history of the writ from the Founding to Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Boumediene v. Bush, Wert illuminates crucial developmental moments in its evolution. He demonstrates that during the antebellum period, Reconstruction, Gilded Age, Great Society, and the ongoing war on terrorism, habeas corpus has waxed and waned in harmony with the interests of majoritarian politics. Along the way, Wert identifies and explains the political context of fine points of law that many political scientists and historians may not be aware of-such as the exhaustion rule requiring that a federal habeas participant must first exhaust all possible claims for relief in state court, a maneuver by which the post-Reconstruction Court abandoned supervision of race relations in the South. Especially in light of the new scrutiny of habeas corpus
prompted by the Guantnamo detainees, Wert's book is essential for
broadening our understanding of how law and politics continue to
intersect after 9/11. Brimming with fresh insights into
constitutional development and regime theory, it shows that the
Great Writ of Liberty may not be so great as we have
supposed--because while it has the potential to enforce conceptions
of rights that are consistent with the best ideals of American
politics, it also has the potential to enforce its worst aspects as
well.
|
![]() ![]() You may like...
|