The resolution of the 2000 presidential election by the U.S. Supreme Court's Bush v. Gore decision generated an extraordinary outpouring of literature in a very short period of time. Now that the initial furor over the decision has subsided, The Final Arbiter presents a sober consideration of the consequences of the decision for the law, the presidency, and the legitimacy of the American political system. The contributors include well-established names in law and political science, as well as up-and-coming scholars, offering a broad understanding of Bush v. Gore's long-term impact. This book will be useful as a classroom text in both survey courses on elections and the courts and for advanced courses that consider the impact of judicial rulings on the government and political process.
In analyzing the Supreme Court's powers in federal-state relations, the author demonstrates that the framers of the constitution clearly intended that the Court should be the federal umpire, thus disproving a charge by modern states' righters of usurpation of power by the Supreme Court. In each historical period the effect of the Court interpretations on the autonomy of the state governments and on the acceleration of federal centralization is considered. Originally published in 1958. A UNC Press Enduring Edition -- UNC Press Enduring Editions use the latest in digital technology to make available again books from our distinguished backlist that were previously out of print. These editions are published unaltered from the original, and are presented in affordable paperback formats, bringing readers both historical and cultural value.
Relied on by students, professors, and practitioners, Erwin Chemerinsky’s popular treatise clearly states the law and identifies the underlying policy issues in each area of constitutional law. Thorough coverage of the topic makes it appropriate for both beginning and advanced courses. New to the Sixth Edition: New discussion of the Preamble to the Constitution in Ch. 1 Discussion of many new cases throughout the book. Major new decisions include: Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission; Gill v. Whitford; Zivotofsky v. Kerry; Lucia v. SEC; South Dakota v. Wayfair; Fisher v. University of Texas, Austin; Obergefell v. Hodges; Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt; Matal v. Tam; Williams-Yulee v. Florida State Bar; National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra; Janus v. American Federation; Town of Greece v. Galloway; and Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer New materials on presidential power, immigration, and travel bans under the Trump administration, including IRAP v. Trump and Hawaii v. Trump Professors and students will benefit from: Renowned authorship Examination of black-letter law and all the myriad issues of constitutional interpretation with unrivaled thoroughness and lucidity Excellent historical overview of the creation and ratification of the Constitution, examining the existential question of why we have a constitution
This study entails a theoretical reading of the Iranian modern history and follows an interdisciplinary agenda at the intersection of philosophy, psychoanalysis, economics, and politics and intends to offer a novel framework for the analysis of socio-economic development in Iran in the modern era. A brief review of Iranian modern history from the Constitutional Revolution to the Oil Nationalization Movement, the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and the recent Reformist and Green Movements demonstrates that Iranian people travelled full circle. This historical experience of socio-economic development revolving around the bitter question of “Why are we backward?” and its manifestation in perpetual socio-political instability and violence is the subject matter of this study. Michel Foucault’s conceived relation between the production of truth and production of wealth captures the essence of hypothesis offered in this study. Foucault (1980: 93–94) maintains that “In the last analysis, we must produce truth as we must produce wealth; indeed we must produce truth in order to produce wealth in the first place.” Based on a hybrid methodology combining hermeneutics of understanding and hermeneutics of suspicion, this monograph proposes that the failure to produce wealth has had particular roots in the failure in the production of truth and trust. At the heart of the proposed theoretical model is the following formula: the Iranian subject’s confused preference structure culminates in the formation of unstable coalitions which in turn leads to institutional failure, creating a chaotic social order and a turbulent history as experienced by the Iranian nation in the modern era. As such, the society oscillates between the chaotic states of socio-political anarchy emanating from irreconcilable differences between and within social assemblages and their affiliated hybrid forms of regimes of truth in the springs of freedom and repressive states of order in the winters of discontent. Each time, after the experience of chaos, the order is restored based on the emergence of a final arbiter (Iranian leviathan) as the evolved coping strategy for achieving conflict resolution. This highly volatile truth cycle produces the experience of socio-economic backwardness and violence. The explanatory power of the theoretical framework offered in the study exploring the relation between the production of truth, trust, and wealth is demonstrated via providing historical examples from strong events of Iranian modern history. The significant policy implications of the model are explored. This monograph will appeal to researchers, scholars, graduate students, policy makers and anyone interested in the Middle Eastern politics, Iran, development studies and political economy.
Author: United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws
Considers legislation to limit Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over congressional investigations, Federal or state security programs, school board decisions on teacher subversive activity, or state bar association lawyer admission practices regarding subversive activity.
It is well known that the radical libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick sharply distinguished his vision of the free society from egalitarian liberals such as John Rawls. Less remarked upon is the distinction he drew between the free society governed by a strictly limited government, commonly referred to as 'minarchism', and the society without any government at all - anarchism. In this volume, the editors, Long - an anarchist - and Machan - a minarchist - have brought together a selection of specially commissioned essays from key theorists actively involved in this debate. Each tackles the question of whether or not a government forms a legitimate part of a free society or whether anarchy/minarchy is merely a distinction without a difference.
