This title examines the discretionary powers of the President of India. It is replete with examples mainly drawn from India, the Commonwealth countries, and Great Britain, of actual instances of exercise of such powers by a constitutional sovereign. For instance, the book flags the crucial role a President can play in the event of a hung parliament.
Who controls American immigration policy? The biggest immigration controversies of the last decade have all involved policies produced by the President policies such as President Obama's decision to protect Dreamers from deportation and President Trump's proclamation banning immigrants from several majority-Muslim nations. While critics of these policies have been separated by a vast ideological chasm, their broadsides have embodied the same widely shared belief: that Congress, not the President, ought to dictate who may come to the United States and who will be forced to leave. This belief is a myth. In The President and Immigration Law, Adam B. Cox and Cristina M. Rodríguez chronicle the untold story of how, over the course of two centuries, the President became our immigration policymaker-in-chief. Diving deep into the history of American immigration policy from founding-era disputes over deporting sympathizers with France to contemporary debates about asylum-seekers at the Southern border they show how migration crises, real or imagined, have empowered presidents. Far more importantly, they also uncover how the Executive's ordinary power to decide when to enforce the law, and against whom, has become an extraordinarily powerful vehicle for making immigration policy. This pathbreaking account helps us understand how the United States ?has come to run an enormous shadow immigration system-one in which nearly half of all noncitizens in the country are living in violation of the law. It also provides a blueprint for reform, one that accepts rather than laments the role the President plays in shaping the national community, while also outlining strategies to curb the abuse of law enforcement authority in immigration and beyond.
"A 1975 state-wide law in Texas made it legal for school districts to bar students from public schools if they were in the country illegally, thus making it extremely difficult or even possible for scores of children to receive an education. The resulting landmark Supreme Court case, Plyler v. Doe (1982), established the constitutional right of children to attend public elementary and secondary schools regardless of legal status and changed how the nation approached the conversation about immigration outside the law. Today, as the United States takes steps towards immigration policy reform, Americans are subjected to polarized debates on what the country should do with its "illegal" or "undocumented" population. In Immigration Outside the Law, acclaimed immigration law expert Hiroshi Motomura takes a neutral, legally-accurate approach in his attention and responses to the questions surrounding those whom he calls "unauthorized migrants." In a reasoned and careful discussion, he seeks to explain why unlawful immigration is such a contentious debate in the United States and to offer suggestions for what should be done about it. He looks at ways in which unauthorized immigrants are becoming part of American society and why it is critical to pave the way for this integration. In the final section of the book, Motomura focuses on practical and politically viable solutions to the problem in three public policy areas: international economic development, domestic economic policy, and educational policy. Amidst the extreme opinions voiced daily in the media, Motomura explains the complicated topic of immigration outside the law in an understandable and refreshingly objective way for students and scholars studying immigration law, policy-makers looking for informed opinions, and any American developing an opinion on this contentious issue"--
For this new edition, Louis Fisher has updated his arguments to include critiques of the Clinton & Bush presidencies, particularly the Use of Force Act, the Iraq Resolution of 2002, the 'preemption doctrine' of the current U.S. administration, & the order authorizing military tribunals.
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, many questioned whether the large number of political appointees in the Federal Emergency Management Agency contributed to the agency's poor handling of the catastrophe, ultimately costing hundreds of lives and causing immeasurable pain and suffering. The Politics of Presidential Appointments examines in depth how and why presidents use political appointees and how their choices impact government performance--for better or worse. One way presidents can influence the permanent bureaucracy is by filling key posts with people who are sympathetic to their policy goals. But if the president's appointees lack competence and an agency fails in its mission--as with Katrina--the president is accused of employing his friends and allies to the detriment of the public. Through case studies and cutting-edge analysis, David Lewis takes a fascinating look at presidential appointments dating back to the 1960s to learn which jobs went to appointees, which agencies were more likely to have appointees, how the use of appointees varied by administration, and how it affected agency performance. He argues that presidents politicize even when it hurts performance--and often with support from Congress--because they need agencies to be responsive to presidential direction. He shows how agency missions and personnel--and whether they line up with the president's vision--determine which agencies presidents target with appointees, and he sheds new light on the important role patronage plays in appointment decisions.
Vital perspectives for the divided Trump era on what the Constitution's framers intended when they defined the extent—and limits—of presidential power One of the most vexing questions for the framers of the Constitution was how to create a vigorous and independent executive without making him king. In today's divided public square, presidential power has never been more contested. The President Who Would Not Be King cuts through the partisan rancor to reveal what the Constitution really tells us about the powers of the president. Michael McConnell provides a comprehensive account of the drafting of presidential powers. Because the framers met behind closed doors and left no records of their deliberations, close attention must be given to their successive drafts. McConnell shows how the framers worked from a mental list of the powers of the British monarch, and consciously decided which powers to strip from the presidency to avoid tyranny. He examines each of these powers in turn, explaining how they were understood at the time of the founding, and goes on to provide a framework for evaluating separation of powers claims, distinguishing between powers that are subject to congressional control and those in which the president has full discretion. Based on the Tanner Lectures at Princeton University, The President Who Would Not Be King restores the original vision of the framers, showing how the Constitution restrains the excesses of an imperial presidency while empowering the executive to govern effectively.
This landmark volume of specially commissioned, original contributions by top international scholars organizes the issues and controversies of the rich and rapidly maturing field of comparative constitutional law. Divided into sections on constitutional design and redesign, identity, structure, individual rights and state duties, courts and constitutional interpretation, this comprehensive volume covers over 100 countries as well as a range of approaches to the boundaries of constitutional law. While some chapters reference the text of legal instruments expressly labeled constitutional, others focus on the idea of entrenchment or take a more functional approach. Challenging the current boundaries of the field, the contributors offer diverse perspectives - cultural, historical and institutional - as well as suggestions for future research. A unique and enlightening volume, Comparative Constitutional Law is an essential resource for students and scholars of the subject.
Despite the critical role played by the Supreme Court of India, the lives of the judges have never been studied before. This seminal book presents biographical essays for each of the first ninety-three judges who served on the Court from 1950 through mid-1989. The essays in the book are based on interviews the author conducted with sixty-four of the sixty-eight judges who were alive in the 1980s, and on meetings and correspondence with family members or relatives, friends, and associates of the deceased judges. An attempt is made to account for why certain judges rather than others were chosen, the selection criteria employed and, to the extent possible in a secretive selection environment, to identify those who selected them. It concludes with a collective portrait of these judges, paying particular attention to changes in their background characteristics—fathers' occupation, education, pre-SCI career, caste, religion, state of birth, and region, over four decades. The essays also embrace their post-retirement activities.
Ten years after the landmark legislation, Ezekiel Emanuel leads a crowd of experts, policy-makers, doctors, and scholars as they evaluate the Affordable Care Act's history so far. In March 2010, the Affordable Care Act officially became one of the seminal laws determining American health care. From day one, the law was challenged in court, making it to the Supreme Court four separate times. It transformed the way a three-trillion-dollar sector of the economy behaved and brought insurance to millions of people. It spawned the Tea Party, further polarized American politics, and affected the electoral fortunes of both parties. Ten years after the bill's passage, a constellation of experts--insiders and academics for and against the ACA--describe the momentousness of the legislation. Encompassing Democrats and Republicans, along with legal, financial, and health policy experts, the essays here offer a fascinating and revealing insight into the political fight of a generation, its consequences for health care, politics, law, the economy-and the future.
Managerial Discretion In Government Decision Making: Beyond The Street Level Provides A Comprehensive Discussion Of Managerial And Executive Discretion At All Levels Of Government. Beginning With A Discussion Of Moving Beyond Street-Level Discourse, This Book Sets The Stage For Studying Managerial Discretion. It Examines Aspects Of Expertise In Discretionary Decision Making At The Federal Level, Including Several Case Examples To Account For The Wide Usage Of Executive Orders In Managerial Positions, And Examines The Formal Roles Of Managers At State Government Levels, While Highlighting The Variations Among State Managers In Their Usage Of Discretion, With Examples Of State Managers With Too Much Discretion. Next The Book Identifies Key Aspects Of Managerial Discretion In Local Governments, Including Information On The Applicability Of Discretion In School Districts And Its Implications In Decision Making, Discusses The Myriad Ways In Which Managers In Local Jurisdictions Either Individually Or Collectively Make Decisions Within The Parameters Of State Laws, Board Regulations, And/Or Council Ordinances, And Concludes With A Discussion Of How Much Discretion Managers Should Have And Dangers Inherent In Providing Managers With Too Much Discretion, And Reinforces The Discourses On Accountability In Public Organizations.
