You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
The definitive biography of one of the most controversial figures of the 19th century captures a life that was complex and fascinating, evil and good. Illustrated.
1850-1931 (v. 1-40) include reports and papers of the Yorkshire Architectural and York Archaeological Society, and some years, of the Worcestershire Archaeological Society, of the Leicestershire Archaeological Society and of other similar societies.
At the intersection of law and politics stands the U.S. Solicitor General. Although even the informed public rarely thinks of the solicitor general in relation to the major issues that have challenged American society, this office actually has considerable control over the cases the Supreme Court addresses. To bring the Office of Solicitor General (OSG) out of the shadows and into the clear light of public attention, Between Law and Politics looks at three hotly contested policy areas—race, gender, and reproductive rights—to see how the office balances the goals of the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court. The OSG is charged with helping the Supreme Court build a coherent doctrine ...
Dear Friends, It seems like it was only yesterday that we drove the last of you to the airport. The memories and the spirit of the Scientific Detectors for Astronomy Workshop (SDW2002) remain fresh and strong. For us, this was a very special event, a great gathering of what may be one of the friendliest and most cooperative technical communities on our little planet. We have tried to capture the spirit of the Workshop in these Proceedings and we hope you are able to relive your week in Hawaii. For those readers who did not attend, we invite you into this community. As you probably noticed, there is a new name on the cover: Jenna Beletic was the ace up our sleeve for these Proceedings. As a s...
Reprint of the original, first published in 1837.
In Judging Democracy, Christopher Manfredi and Mark Rush challenge assertions that the Canadian and American Supreme Courts have taken radically different approaches to constitutional interpretation regarding general and democratic rights. Three case studies compare Canadian and American law concerning prisoners' voting rights, the scope and definition of voting rights, and campaign spending. These examples demonstrate that the two Supreme Courts have engaged in essentially the same debates concerning the franchise, access to the ballot, and the concept of a "meaningful" vote. They reveal that the American Supreme Court has never been entirely individualistic in its interpretation and protec...