Welcome to our book review site go-pdf.online!
You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
I Dissent
For the first time, a collection of dissents from the most famous Supreme Court cases If American history can truly be traced through the majority decisions in landmark Supreme Court cases, then what about the dissenting opinions? In issues of race, gender, privacy, workers' rights, and more, would advances have been impeded or failures rectified if the dissenting opinions were in fact the majority opinions? In offering thirteen famous dissents-from Marbury v. Madison and Brown v. Board of Education to Griswold v. Connecticut and Lawrence v. Texas, each edited with the judges' eloquence preserved-renowned Supreme Court scholar Mark Tushnet reminds us that court decisions are not pronouncemen...
Dissenting and Separate Opinions at the World Court
This edition differs from its predecessors in that, at the request of many French-speaking & other jurists, it is now completely bilingual, in the two official languages of the International Court of Justice under Article 39 of the Statute -English & French. As before, this compilation aims to provide the practitioner in the Court, the diplomat, the politician & the student with a handy & complete collection of documents relating to the operation of the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. In order to increase the usefulness of this compilation, the unofficial translations of the Rules of Court of 1978 into Arabic, Chinese, Russian & Spanish -the official languages of the United Nations -have been included.
Dissenting Opinions
The term "dissenting opinions" is normally used in the law to describe the judgments of those members of appellate courts who take a different view in a particular case from their colleagues who form the majority and effectively decide the question before the court. I have used it, however, in relation to this collection of articles and book reviews published over several decades because they proposed in the main a departure from what might be characterised as the conventional wisdom, that is, the views and values of those who preside over most public and private intuitions in Australia, including much of the media. I do not suggest for a moment that there has been any disadvantage to myself...
Dissenting Judgments in the Law
In Dissenting Judgments in the Law a team of expert contributors reassess nineteen landmark cases from different areas of the law, each of which had the potential for the law to have developed in a markedly different direction. The cases have been selected on account of their continued relevance to the law today or the controversial nature of the majority's decision. A key feature of each case was a dissenting opinion from a judge who thought that the law should develop in a different direction. The aim of the contributors is to re-evaluate important cases, such as YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27, Scruttons Ltd v Midland Silicones Ltd [1962] AC 446 and R v Hinks [2000] UKHL 53 by...
When Dissents Matter
The ability of US Supreme Court justices to dissent from the majority, to formally register and explain their belief that a case has been wrongly decided, represents a time-honored tradition of perhaps the most august American institution. Yet the impact of these dissents, which allow justices to engage in a dialogue over law and policy, has seldom, if ever, been the focus of dedicated study. Analyzing the influence of past dissents on later Supreme Court majority opinions, this book presents the first comprehensive study of the effects of dissenting opinions and illuminates which types of dissents successfully influence legal and policy debates, which ones fail to make a difference, and why. Drawing on the private papers of the justices and original data, this book demonstrates that court majorities engage with dissents posing a particular threat to their opinions, and that they can be persuaded by thoughtful and careful dissenting arguments.
The Intricacies of Dicta and Dissent
Common-law judgments tend to be more than merely judgments, for judges often make pronouncements that they need not have made had they kept strictly to the task in hand. Why do they do this? The Intricacies of Dicta and Dissent examines two such types of pronouncement, obiter dicta and dissenting opinions, primarily as aspects of English case law. Neil Duxbury shows that both of these phenomena have complex histories, have been put to a variety of uses, and are not amenable to being straightforwardly categorized as secondary sources of law. This innovative and unusual study casts new light on – and will prompt lawyers to pose fresh questions about – the common law tradition and the nature of judicial decision-making.
When Judges Dissent
A compilation of 53 opinions on European Court judgments by Judge Giovanni Bonello.
The Limits of Legitimacy
An exploration of how sensationalist reporting, which emphasizes dissenting opinions and dramatizes complex legal issues, fosters public controversy and influences citizens' reactions to Supreme Court decisions
Dissenting Voices in American Society
Dissenting Voices in American Society: The Role of Judges, Lawyers, and Citizens explores the status of dissent in the work and lives of judges, lawyers, and citizens, and in our institutions and culture. It brings together under the lens of critical examination dissenting voices that are usually treated separately: the protester, the academic critic, the intellectual, and the dissenting judge. It examines the forms of dissent that institutions make possible and those that are discouraged or domesticated. This book also describes the kinds of stories that dissenting voices try to tell and the narrative tropes on which those stories depend. This book is the product of an integrated series of symposia at the University of Alabama School of Law. These symposia bring leading scholars into colloquy with faculty at the law school on subjects at the cutting edge of interdisciplinary inquiry in law.
Judicial Dissent in European Constitutional Courts
Dissent in courts has always existed. It is natural and healthy that judges disagree on legal issues of a certain importance and difficulty. The question is if it is reasonable to conceal dissent. Not every legal system allows judges to explain their disagreement to the public in a separate opinion attached to the judgment of the court. Most constitutional courts do. This book presents a comparative analysis of the practice of judicial dissent in constitutional courts from the perspective of the civil law tradition. It discusses the theoretical background, presents the history of the institution and today’s practice, thus laying down the basis for an accurate consideration of the phenomenon from a legal perspective.
