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.
Comparative Judicial Politics
Comparative Judicial Politics synthesizes the now extensive scholarly work on judicial politics from around the world, focusing on legal traditions, lawyers, judges, constitutional review, international and transnational courts, and the impact and legitimacy of courts. It offers typologies where relevant and intentionally raises questions to challenge readers’ preconceptions of “best” practices.
Judicial Politics in Europe
Judicial Politics in Europe traces relations between each of the Member State judiciaries of nine countries of the European Community with the European Court of Justice, centering on the legal issue of preliminary rulings. The purpose of this exploration is to describe in a political-economic context the changes in these relationships over the period from 1961 to 1981 and to explain the causes and conditions of compliance or defiance of Community norms within the national judiciaries. This book is the first attempt to consider the impact of judicial norms cross-culturally.
Constitutional Politics in Italy
A case study of the Italian Constitutional Court examining its institutional actions since its inception in 1956. Volcansek (political science, Florida International U. argues that the Court (much like its counterparts in other parts of Europe) steers a line between acting as strict interpreter of law and acting as a policy maker. She applies an institutionalist model to explain the Court's roles and structural features. Of particular importance is the role of the Court in negotiating executive-legislative relations, as well as its decisions allowing for popular referendums.
Judicial Power
Explores the relationship between the legitimacy, the efficacy, and the decision-making of national and transnational constitutional courts.
Israel
The essays here attempt to move beyond the question of Israel's "uniqueness" to examine the pace and direction of change of Israel's political, social and economic institutions.
Deciding to Leave
While much has been written on Supreme Court appointments, Deciding to Leave provides the first systematic look at the process by which justices decide to retire from the bench, and why this has become increasingly partisan in recent years. Since 1954, generous retirement provisions and decreasing workloads have allowed justices to depart strategically when a president of their own party occupies the White House. Otherwise, the justices remain in their seats, often past their ability to effectively participate in the work of the Court. While there are benefits and drawbacks to various reform proposals, Ward argues that mandatory retirement goes farthest in combating partisanship and protecting the institution of the Court.
Altered States
Is globalization good for democracy? This book examines the accountability of transnational institutions and traces their impact on democratic governance.
Congress Confronts the Court
The Supreme Court is frequently portrayed as an isolated entity void of politics that reaches judgments by some unseen and unknowable logic. At the same time, Congress is cast as a singularly political enterprise with little regard for nuanced lawmaking. This volume of original essays by leading scholars shows both branches in a new light. It explores the impact of sustained partisan politics, the recent reassertion of legislative power at the expense of judicial review, and the sometimes stormy relationship between Congress and the Court.
Judicial Reputation
In "Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory, "Tom Ginsburg and Nuno Garoupa mean to explain how judges respond to the reputational incentives provided by the different audiences they interact with--lawyers and law professors; politicians; the media; and the public itself--as well as how legal systems design their judicial institutions to calibrate the locally appropriate balance among audiences. Making use by turns of careful empirical work and penetrating conceptual insights, Ginsburg and Garoupa argue that any given judicial structure is best understood not through the lens of legal culture, origin, or tradition, but through the economics of information and reputation.
Judicial Politics in Texas
In recent years, judicial elections have changed dramatically. The elections themselves have become increasingly partisan, interest group involvement in judicial races has escalated, recent court decisions have freed judicial candidates to speak more openly than ever before about their judicial ideologies, and the tenor of judicial campaigns has departed significantly from what were once low-key, sleepy affairs. This book examines the evolution of the new rough-and-tumble politics of judicial elections by focusing on Texas, a bellwether for the new judicial selection politics in America. The Texas experience illustrates what can - and usually will - go wrong when judges are elected, and lays the path for meaningful reforms to stem the tide of the new politics of judicial elections.
