You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Scholars use the most advanced methods in judicial studies to examine the role of Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
Grassroots advocates, public interest attorneys, and legal scholars gathered in October 2011 at the University of Baltimore for the debut symposium of "The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality of Stare Decisis In America." Convening such a broad and in many ways diverse audience, requires the program series to be worthwhile academically, yet have populist appeal. Towards that end, the event website explains: "It is both scholarly and practical to examine the current vitality of stare decisis as a legal doctrine in America." That we use Latin to describe the concept suggests it is complex, mysterious, and beyond the cares of most Americans. Yet stare decisis, sometimes called the "doctrine o...
The Tenth Edition brings together the high-quality research expected from this trusted text, with comprehensive and comparative analysis of the fifty U.S. states.
In the last ten years, there has been a resurgence of interest in repression and violence within states. Paths to State Repression improves our understanding of why states use political repression, highlighting its relationship to dissent and mass protest. The authors draw upon a wide variety of political-economic contexts, methodological approaches, and geographic locales, including Cuba, Nicaragua, Peru, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Israel, Eastern Europe, and Africa. This book is invaluable to all who wish to better understand why central authorities violate and restrict human rights and how states can break their cycles of conflict.
Exploring the little-known history behind the legal doctrine of prior appropriation--"first in time is first in right"--used to apportion water resources in the western United States, this book focuses on the important case of Wyoming v. Colorado (1922). U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Willis Van Devanter, a former Chief Justice of Wyoming, ruled in that state's favor, finding that prior appropriation applied across state lines--a controversial opinion influenced by cronyism. The dicta in the case, that the U.S. Government has no interest in state water allocation law, drove the balkanization of interstate water systems and resulted in the Colorado River Interstate Compact between Wyomi...
One of the more enduring topics of concern for empirically-oriented scholars of law and courts—and political scientists more generally—is how research can be more directly relevant to broader audiences outside of academia. A significant part of this issue goes back to a seeming disconnect between empirical and normative scholars of law and courts that has increased in recent years. Brandon L. Bartels and Chris W. Bonneau argue that being attuned to the normative implications of one’s work enhances the quality of empirical work, not to mention makes it substantially more interesting to both academics and non-academic practitioners. Their book’s mission is to examine how the normative ...
Leading authorities present the latest cutting edge research on state judicial elections. Starting with recent transformations in the electoral landscape, including those brought about by U.S. Supreme Court rulings, this volume provides penetrating analyses of partisan, nonpartisan, and retention elections to state supreme courts, intermediate appellate courts, and trial courts. Topics include citizen participation, electoral competition, fundraising and spending, judicial performance evaluations, reform efforts,attack campaigns, and other organized efforts to oust judges. This volume also evaluates the impact of judicial elections on numerous aspects of American politics, including citizens’ perceptions of judicial legitimacy, diversity on the bench, and the consequences of who wins on subsequent court decisions. Many of the chapters offer predictions about how judicial elections might look in the future. Overall, this collection provides a sharp evidence-based portrait of how modern judicial elections actually work in practice and their consequences for state judiciaries and the American people.
This first-of-its-kind volume surveys twenty constitutional judges who 'towered' over their peers, exploring their complexities and flaws.
Comparing law to the American practice of common courtesy, this book explains how our courts not only survive under conditions of suspected hypocrisy, but actually depend on these conditions to function.
The U.S. Supreme Court is not a unitary actor and it does not function in a vacuum. It is part of an integrated political system in which its decisions and doctrine must be viewed in a broader context. In some areas, the Court is the lead policy maker. In other areas, the Court fills in the gaps of policy created in the legislative and executive branches. In either instance, the Supreme Court’s work is influenced by and in turn influences all three branches of the federal government as well as the interests and opinions of the American people. Pacelle analyzes the Court’s interaction in the separation of powers system, detailing its relationship to the presidency, Congress, the bureaucra...