Clashing Views on Legal Issues
Descriere: @lt;b@gt;Taking Sides@lt;/b@gt; volumes present current controversial issues in a debate-style format designed to stimulate student interest and develop critical thinking skills. Each issue is thoughtfully framed with an issue summary, an issue introduction, and a postscript or challenge questions. @lt;b@gt;Taking Sides@lt;/b@gt; readers feature an annotated listing of selected World Wide Web sites. An online Instructor's Resource Guide with testing material is available for each volume. @lt;i@gt;Using Taking Sides in the Classroom@lt;/i@gt; is also an excellent instructor resource. Visit www.mhhe.com/takingsides for more details.
Autori: M. Ethan Katsh | Editura: Dushkin/McGraw-Hill | Anul aparitiei: 2010 | ISBN: 9780077395094 | Numar de pagini: 448 | Categorie: Legal
Karte.ro va recomanda:
Jonathan Gienapp (Author)
Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique
9,A detailed and compelling examination of how the legal theory of originalism ignores and distorts the very constitutional history from which it derives interpretive authority "What are the chances that, in 2024, a new book could fundamentally reorient how we understand America's founding? Jonathan Gienapp . . . has written such a book. . . . You read it, and you get vertigo. . . . Gienapp's book comes as a thunderclap."--Cass Sunstein, Washington Post Longlisted for the Cundill History Prize, 2025 - History Today Book of the Year, 2024 Constitutional originalism stakes law to history. The theory's core tenet--that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning--has us decide questions of modern constitutional law by consulting the distant constitutional past. Yet originalist engagement with history is often deeply problematic. And now that a majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court champion originalism, the task of scrutinizing originalists' use and abuse of history has never been more urgent. In this comprehensive and novel critique of originalism, Jonathan Gienapp targets originalists' unspoken assumptions about the Constitution and its ...
Mark Tushnet (Author)
Who Am I to Judge?: Judicial Craft Versus Constitutional Theory
9, A leading legal scholar asks a fundamental question: Do we need a theory of constitutional interpretation? Do we need a theory of constitutional interpretation? It is a common argument among originalists that however objectionable you may find their theory, at least they have one, whereas their opponents do not have any theory at all. But as Mark Tushnet argues, for most of the Supreme Court's history, including some of its most exceptional periods, the Court operated without a theory. In this book, Tushnet shows us what a constitutional theory actually is; what judges need from it and why they probably can't get what they need; and the great harm that results when judges allow theory to dictate bad policy. It is not theory that matters, Tushnet argues. The vitally important, indispensable quality in a judge is good judgment.
ce trebuie reconfirmat
Supreme Court (Editor)