In this provocative work, Martin Shapiro proposes an original model for the study of courts, one that emphasizes the different modes of decision making and the multiple political roles that characterize the functioning of courts in different political systems.
One of the great continuing disputes of U.S. politics is about the role of the Supreme Court. Another is about the First Amendment. This book is about both. A classic defense of the openly political role of the Court, this book belies the notion reasserted recently by Chief Justice Roberts that judges are just neutral umpires. Especially in the area of speech, judges make policy; they create law.
Release on 2014-07-24 | by Armin von Bogdandy,Ingo Venzke
A Public Law Theory of International Adjudication
Author: Armin von Bogdandy,Ingo Venzke
Pubpsher: OUP Oxford
The vast majority of all international judicial decisions have been issued since 1990. This increasing activity of international courts over the past two decades is one of the most significant developments within the international law. It has repercussions on all levels of governance and has challenged received understandings of the nature and legitimacy of international courts. It was previously held that international courts are simply instruments of dispute settlement, whose activities are justified by the consent of the states that created them, and in whose name they decide. However, this understanding ignores other important judicial functions, underrates problems of legitimacy, and prevents a full assessment of how international adjudication functions, and the impact that it has demonstrably had. This book proposes a public law theory of international adjudication, which argues that international courts are multifunctional actors who exercise public authority and therefore require democratic legitimacy. It establishes this theory on the basis of three main building blocks: multifunctionality, the notion of an international public authority, and democracy. The book aims to answer the core question of the legitimacy of international adjudication: in whose name do international courts decide? It lays out the specific problem of the legitimacy of international adjudication, and reconstructs the common critiques of international courts. It develops a concept of democracy for international courts that makes it possible to constructively show how their legitimacy is derived. It argues that ultimately international courts make their decisions, even if they do not know it, in the name of the peoples and the citizens of the international community.
Comparative Law and Society, part of the Research Handbooks in Comparative Law series, is a pioneering volume that comprises 19 original essays written by expert authors from across the world. This innovative handbook offers both a history of the field of comparative law and society and a thorough exploration of its methods, disciplines, and major issues, presenting the most comprehensive look into this contemporary field to date. In Part I, Methods and Disciplines, contributors approach critical issues in comparative law and society from a variety of academic fields, including sociology, criminology, anthropology, economics, political science, and psychology. This multidisciplinary approach highlights the importance of addressing the variance of perspectives inherent to the field. In Part II, Core Issues, chapters offer an exploration of major legal institutions, processes, professionals, and cultures associated with particular legal subjects. Since authors utilize the perspective of at least two different legal systems, this book offers a truly thorough and wide-ranging focus. the general reader, as well as students and scholars, will find this handbook useful in their continuing explorations into the interaction between law and society. Practitioners such as lawyers and judges with an interest in global perspectives of law will also find much to admire in this innovative volume.
Release on 2011-11-09 | by Cassia Spohn,Craig Hemmens
Author: Cassia Spohn,Craig Hemmens
Courts: A Text/Reader provides the best of both worlds— authored text sections with carefully selected accompanying readings that illustrate the questions and controversies legal scholars and court researchers are investigating in the 21st century. The articles, from leading journals in criminology and criminal justice, reflect both classic studies of the criminal court system and state-of-the-art research, and often have a policy perspective that makes them more applied, less theoretical, and more interesting to both undergraduate and graduate students.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms became an entrenched part of the Canadian Constitution on April 17, 1982. The Charter represented a significant change in Canadian constitutional order and carried the courts, and the Supreme Court in particular, decisively into some of the biggest controversies in Canadian politics. Although the impact of the Charter on Canadian law and society was profound, a new status quo has been established. Even though there will be future Charter surprises and decisions that will claim news headlines, Peter J. McCormick argues that these cases will be occasional rather than frequent, and that the Charter "revolution" is over. Or, as he puts it in his introduction, "I will tell a story about the Charter, about the big ripples that have gradually but steadily died away such that the surface of the pond is now almost smooth." The End of the Charter Revolution explores the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, beginning with a general historical background, followed by a survey of the significant changes brought about as Charter decisions were made. The book addresses a series of specific cases made before the Dickson, Lamer, and McLachlin Courts, and then provides empirical data to support the argument that the Charter revolution has ended. The Supreme Court has without question become "a national institution of the first order," but even though the Charter is a large part of why this has happened, it is not Charter decisions that will showcase the exercise of this power in the future.
Release on 2004-01-01 | by Pieter J. Slot,Mielle K. Bulterman,E.M. Meijers Instituut
Author: Pieter J. Slot,Mielle K. Bulterman,E.M. Meijers Instituut
Pubpsher: Kluwer Law International B.V.
The spectacular growth of the international economy over the past decades has called for a more intensive role for the law, and probably also a different kind of law. In 2002, the Europa Instituut of Leiden University convened a seminar to discuss the various responses to the challenges posed by globalism in different fields of economic activity and legal practice. Their presentations are presented in this book in a more formal and extensive format.
Drawing on the rich resources of the ten-volume series of The Oxford Handbooks of Political Science, this one-volume distillation provides a comprehensive overview of all the main branches of contemporary political science: political theory; political institutions; political behavior; comparative politics; international relations; political economy; law and politics; public policy; contextual political analysis; and political methodology. Sixty-seven of the top political scientists worldwide survey recent developments in those fields and provide penetrating introductions to exciting new fields of study. Following in the footsteps of the New Handbook of Political Science edited by Robert Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingemann a decade before, this Oxford Handbook will become an indispensable guide to the scope and methods of political science as a whole. It will serve as the reference book of record for political scientists and for those following their work for years to come.
The Role of the Constitutional Court in Russian Politics 1990–2006
Author: Alexei Trochev
Pubpsher: Cambridge University Press
This is a study of the actual role that the Russian Constitutional Court played in protecting fundamental rights and resolving legislative-executive struggles and federalism disputes in both Yeltsin's and Putin's Russia. Trochev argues that judicial empowerment is a non-linear process with unintended consequences and that courts that depend on their reputation flourish only if an effective and capable state is there to support them. This is because judges can rely only on the authoritativeness of their judgments, unlike politicians and bureaucrats, who have the material resources necessary to respond to judicial decisions. Drawing upon systematic analysis of all decisions of the Russian Court (published and unpublished) and previously unavailable materials on their (non-)implementation, and resting on a combination of the approaches from comparative politics, law, and public administration, this book shows how and why judges attempted to reform Russia's governance and fought to ensure compliance with their judgments.