This book analyzes paradigmatic securities frauds to show how market pressure to deliver short-term results incentivizes companies to deceive investors.
Americans hate bureaucracy—though they love the services it provides—and demand that government run like a business. Hence today’s privatization revolution. Jon Michaels shows how the fusion of politics and profits commercializes government and consolidates state power in ways the Constitution’s framers endeavored to disaggregate.
Addressing a host of hot-button issues, from the barring of Christian student groups and military recruiters from law schools and universities to churches’ immunity from civil rights legislation in hiring and firing ministers, Paul Horwitz proposes a radical reformation of First Amendment law. Arguing that rigidly doctrinal approaches can’t account for messy, real-world situations, he suggests that the courts loosen their reins and let those institutions with a stake in First Amendment freedoms do more of the work of enforcing them. Universities, the press, libraries, churches, and various other institutions and associations are a fundamental part of the infrastructure of public discourse. Rather than subject them to ill-fitting, top-down rules and legal categories, courts should make them partners in shaping public discourse and First Amendment law, giving these institutions substantial autonomy to regulate their own affairs. Self-regulation and public criticism should be the key restraints on these institutions, not judicial fiat. Horwitz suggests that this approach would help the law enhance the contribution of our “First Amendment institutions” to social and political life. It would also move us toward a conception of the state as a participating member of our social framework, rather than a reigning and often overbearing sovereign. First Amendment Institutions offers a new vantage point from which to evaluate ongoing debates over topics ranging from campaign finance reform to campus hate speech and affirmative action in higher education. This book promises to promote—and provoke—important new discussions about the shape and future of the First Amendment.
Lawyers and Clients: Critical Issues in Interviewing and Counseling examines practical and theoretical challenges lawyers face with clients. Each chapter explores a critical issue in interviewing and counseling, such as developing connection across difference, dealing with atypical clients, and using engaged client-centered counseling. Ellmann, Dinerstein, Gunning, Kruse, and Shelleck investigate these issues primarily through detailed analysis of lawyer-client conversations, which invite the reader to consider and critique the lawyer's choices. A key theme is "engaged client-centered lawyering," which emphasizes the importance of client choice and the impact of lawyers on clients, and affirms lawyers' ability to achieve wise engagement with clients.
Democracies are in danger. Around the world, a rising wave of populist leaders threatens to erode the core structures of democratic self-rule. In the United States, the tenure of Donald Trump has seemed decisive turning point for many. What kind of president intimidates jurors, calls the news media the “enemy of the American people,” and seeks foreign assistance investigating domestic political rivals? Whatever one thinks of President Trump, many think the Constitution will safeguard us from lasting damage. But is that assumption justified? How to Save a Constitutional Democracy mounts an urgent argument that we can no longer afford to be complacent. Drawing on a rich array of other countries’ experiences with democratic backsliding, Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Z. Huq show how constitutional rules can both hinder and hasten the decline of democratic institutions. The checks and balances of the federal government, a robust civil society and media, and individual rights—such as those enshrined in the First Amendment—often fail as bulwarks against democratic decline. The sobering reality for the United States, Ginsburg and Huq contend, is that the Constitution’s design makes democratic erosion more, not less, likely. Its structural rigidity has had unforeseen consequence—leaving the presidency weakly regulated and empowering the Supreme Court conjure up doctrines that ultimately facilitate rather than inhibit rights violations. Even the bright spots in the Constitution—the First Amendment, for example—may have perverse consequences in the hands of a deft communicator who can degrade the public sphere by wielding hateful language banned in many other democracies. We—and the rest of the world—can do better. The authors conclude by laying out practical steps for how laws and constitutional design can play a more positive role in managing the risk of democratic decline.
"Islamic Law and International Law is a comprehensive examination of differences and similarities between the Islamic legal tradition and international law, especially in the context of dispute settlement. Sharia embraces a unique logic and culture of justice--based on nonconfrontational dispute resolution--as taught by the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad. This book explains how the creeds of Islamic dispute resolution shape the Islamic milieu's views of international law. Is the Islamic legal tradition ab initio incompatible with international law, and how do states of the Islamic milieu view international courts, mediation, and arbitration? Islamic law constitutes an important part of the domestic legal system in many states of the Islamic milieu--Islamic law states--displacing secular law in state governance and affecting these states' contemporary international dealings. The book analyzes constitutional and subconstitutional laws in Islamic law states. The answer to the "Islamic law-international law nexus puzzle" lies in the diversity of how secular laws and religious laws fuse in domestic legal systems across the Islamic milieu. These states are not Islamic to the same degree or in the same way. Thus, different international conflict management methods appeal to different states, depending on each one's domestic legal system. The main claim of the book is that in many instances the Islamic legal tradition points in one direction while Western-based, secularized international law points in another direction. This conflict is partially softened by the reality that the Islamic legal tradition itself has elements fundamentally compatible with modern international law. Islamic legal tradition, international law, sharia settlement, peaceful dispute resolution"--
Gender Justice and the Law presents a collection of essays that examines how gender, as a category of identity, must continually be understood in relation to how structures of inequality define and shape its meaning. It asks how notions of “justice” shape gender identity and whether the legal justice system itself privileges notions of gender or is itself gendered. Shaped by politics and policy, Gender Justice essays contribute to understanding how theoretical practices of intersectionality relate to structures of inequality and relations formed as a result of their interaction. Given its theme, the collection’s essays examine theoretical practices of intersectional identity at the nexus of “gender and justice” that might also relate to issues of sexuality, race, class, age, and ability.