You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
For two centuries, federal judges exercised wide discretion in criminal sentencing. In 1987 a complex bureaucratic apparatus termed Sentencing "Guidelines" was imposed on federal courts. FEAR OF JUDGING is the first full-scale history, analysis, and critique of the new sentencing regime, arguing that it sacrifices comprehensibility and common sense.
Few institutions have become as ferociously fought over in democratic politics as the courts. While political criticism of judges in this country goes back to its inception, today’s intensely ideological assault is nearly unprecedented. Spend any amount of time among the writings of contemporary right-wing critics of judicial power, and you are virtually assured of seeing repeated complaints about the “imperial judiciary.” American conservatives contend not only that judicial power has expanded dangerously in recent decades, but that liberal judges now willfully write their policy preferences into law. They raise alarms that American courts possess a degree of power incompatible with t...
"My behavior is not a Yankee's behavior. It just is not, no matter what. My family was Italian, and different from most other Italian immigrants. We did not need to melt in. We did not need to assimilate, because of who we were and what we came from. While other people were painting themselves red, white, and blue, we talked Italian, absorbed our family's history, and thought of ourselves as being what we always were. In the deepest sense, I was never taught to be a Yankee, which is a fact that comes out in any number of the things that I do and try to accomplish. Some people have the feeling that what I write and say is too subtle, or perhaps manipulative; or that I behave a bit outlandishly; but those people do not put what I do in the context of Italy, in the context of that very old, very subtle, very complicated society, which I come from"--
The American criminal justice system is becoming ever more centralized and punitive, owing to rampant federalization and mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines. Go Directly to Jail examines these alarming trends and proposes reforms that could rein in a criminal justice apparatus at war with fairness and common sense.
A major reappraisal of crime and punishment in America The huge prison buildup of the past four decades has few defenders, yet reforms to reduce the numbers of those incarcerated have been remarkably modest. Meanwhile, an ever-widening carceral state has sprouted in the shadows, extending its reach far beyond the prison gate. It sunders families and communities and reworks conceptions of democracy, rights, and citizenship—posing a formidable political and social challenge. In Caught, Marie Gottschalk examines why the carceral state remains so tenacious in the United States. She analyzes the shortcomings of the two dominant penal reform strategies—one focused on addressing racial disparities, the other on seeking bipartisan, race-neutral solutions centered on reentry, justice reinvestment, and reducing recidivism. With a new preface evaluating the effectiveness of recent proposals to reform mass incarceration, Caught offers a bracing appraisal of the politics of penal reform.
The explosive rise in the U.S. incarceration rate in the second half of the twentieth century, and the racial transformation of the prison population from mostly white at mid-century to sixty-five percent black and Latino in the present day, is a trend that cannot easily be ignored. Many believe that this shift began with the "tough on crime" policies advocated by Republicans and southern Democrats beginning in the late 1960s, which sought longer prison sentences, more frequent use of the death penalty, and the explicit or implicit targeting of politically marginalized people. In The First Civil Right, Naomi Murakawa inverts the conventional wisdom by arguing that the expansion of the federa...
Is life without parole the perfect compromise to the death penalty? Or is it as ethically fraught as capital punishment? This comprehensive, interdisciplinary anthology treats life without parole as “the new death penalty.” Editors Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. and Austin Sarat bring together original work by prominent scholars in an effort to better understand the growth of life without parole and its social, cultural, political, and legal meanings. What justifies the turn to life imprisonment? How should we understand the fact that this penalty is used disproportionately against racial minorities? What are the most promising avenues for limiting, reforming, or eliminating life without parole sentences in the United States? Contributors explore the structure of life without parole sentences and the impact they have on prisoners, where the penalty fits in modern theories of punishment, and prospects for (as well as challenges to) reform.
This issue of the Yale Law Journal (the fourth issue of academic year 2015-2016) features articles and essays by notable scholars, as well as extensive student research. The issue is dedicated to the memory of Professor Robert A. Burt, with essays in his honor by Robert Post, Owen Fiss, Monroe Price, Martha Minow, Martin Boehmer, Anthony Kronman, Frank Iacobucci, and Andrew David Burt. In addition, the issue's contents include: • Article, "The First Patent Litigation Explosion," Christopher Beauchamp • Article, "The Lost 'Effects' of the Fourth Amendment: Giving Personal Property Due Protection," Maureen E. Brady • Note, "Fifty Shades of Gray: Sentencing Trends in Major White-Collar Ca...
This power, by necessity and preference, has become the central congressional tool for participating in national security policy. Inevitably attacks on policy are transformed into attacks on the making and effects of appropriations.