For fifty years, The Supreme Court Review has been lauded for providing authoritative discussion of the court's most significant decisions. The Review is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. Recent volumes have considered such issues as post-9/11 security, the 2000 presidential election, cross-burning, federalism and state sovereignty, failed Supreme Court nominations, and numerous First- and Fourth-Amendment cases.
Published every September in celebration of Constitution Day, the Cato Supreme Court Review brings together leading legal scholars to analyze the most important cases of the Court's most recent term. It is the first scholarly review to appear after the term's end and the only on to critique the court from a Madisonian perspective. This year's review looks at the Supreme Court's recent decisions involving international human rights, racial preferences in high education, and the Voting Rights Act, as well as cutting edge issues of criminal procedure, property rights, and class actions. There's also a point-counterpoint on the patenting of human genes. Finally, the Review will analyze this term’s gay rights cases, one challenging the Defense of Marriage Act and the other taking up California’s Proposition 8.
The application of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule has divided the justices of the Supreme Court for nearly a century. This book traces the rise and fall of the exclusionary rule with insight and behind-the-scenes access into the Court's thinking.
This book explores some of the most glaring misunderstandings about the U.S. Supreme Court—and makes a strong case for why our Supreme Court Justices should not be entrusted with decisions that affect every American citizen. Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is Not a Court and its Justices are Not Judges presents a detailed discussion of the Court's most important and controversial constitutional cases that demonstrates why it doesn't justify being labeled "a court of law." Eric Segall, professor of law at Georgia State University College of Law for two decades, explains why this third branch of the national government is an institution that makes important judgments about fundamental questions based on the Justices' ideological preferences, not the law. A complete understanding of the true nature of the Court's decision-making process is necessary, he argues, before an intelligent debate over who should serve on the Court—and how they should resolve cases—can be held. Addressing front-page areas of constitutional law such as health care, abortion, affirmative action, gun control, and freedom of religion, this book offers a frank description of how the Supreme Court truly operates, a critique of life tenure of its Justices, and a set of proposals aimed at making the Court function more transparently to further the goals of our representative democracy.
"The U.S. Supreme Court: A Very Short Introduction draws on the Court's history and its written and unwritten rules to show how it operates in the twenty-first century. Today's Supreme Court, housed in a majestic building on Capitol Hill, bears little resemblance to the institution launched by the Framers of the Constitution and was originally seen as the weakest of the three branches of government. Over the next 200 years, the Court put the independence the Framers gave it to use and now largely defines itself, exercising so much power over how Americans live that some have begun to question whether the Court has gone too far. How do cases reach the Supreme Court? What features have other courts around the world taken from the Supreme Court, and what have they left?"--
Few institutions in the world are credited with initiating and confounding political change on the scale of the United States Supreme Court. The Court is uniquely positioned to enhance or inhibit political reform, enshrine or dismantle social inequalities, and expand or suppress individual rights. Yet despite claims of victory from judicial activists and complaints of undemocratic lawmaking from the Court's critics, numerous studies of the Court assert that it wields little real power. This book examines the nature of Supreme Court power by identifying conditions under which the Court is successful at altering the behavior of state and private actors. Employing a series of longitudinal studies that use quantitative measures of behavior outcomes across a wide range of issue areas, it develops and supports a new theory of Supreme Court power. Matthew E. K. Hall finds that the Court tends to exercise power successfully when lower courts can directly implement its rulings; however, when the Court must rely on non-court actors to implement its decisions, its success depends on the popularity of those decisions. Overall, this theory depicts the Court as a powerful institution, capable of exerting significant influence over social change.
This book examines whether and how the Office of the Solicitor General influences the United States Supreme Court. Combining archival data with recent innovations in the areas of matching and causal inference, the book finds that the Solicitor General influences every aspect of the Court's decision making process.
