Government Law

Legal luminary Burt Neuborne argues that the structure of the First Amendment as well as of the entire Bill of Rights was more intentional than most people realize, beginning with the internal freedom of conscience and working outward to freedom of expression and finally freedom of public association. This design, Neuborne argues, was not to protect discrete individual rights - such as the rights of corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections.

In November 2001, a 31-year-old Yemeni man named Salim Ahmed Hamdan was captured near the Pakistan border and turned over to U.S. forces in Afghanistan. After confessing to being Osama bin Laden's driver, Hamdan was transferred to Guantánamo Bay and designated for trial before a special military tribunal. The Pentagon assigned a young military defense lawyer, Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift, to represent him in a defense that no one expected to amount to much. But it did.

In an age where the global rules-based world order faces significant challenges to maintaining peace and stabilitywith world superpowers jockeying to preserve their influence across multiple theatres of conflict, this book explores the major international laws and treaties governing the process of peace and reconciliation. Focusing on the conflicts in Afghanistan, Palestine-Israel, and Kashmir, it examines and analyses these conflicts through the prism of international law, humanitarian norms, treaties, and conventions, interspersed with insights from the Islamic legal tradition.

On January 22, 1973, the United States Supreme Court released two interlocked abortion decisions overturning the laws of all the individual states. Only one of the decisions, Roe v. Wade, tends to get much media attention, and it is popularly said that it grants a "woman's right to choose". But Justice Blackmun is in several places very adamant: Though it had been explicitly sought, he was not granting to women the "right to choose". In Doe v. Bolton, the second and often unexamined companion decision, Blackmun is explicit. The right he is granting is to the doctor.

Where Jim's Crows go to Die is a chilling story with many characters, whose destinies are tied to each other. President Ulysees S. Grant finds himself facing the opposition of the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War is over. Ida B. Wells Barnett finds herself becoming the voice of self- defense. Christopher Columbus Nash puts leads the Colfax Massacre, which is the blueprint for several other racial massacres in U.S. history.

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 protecting Dreamers from deportation and President Trump 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 Prosecuting the President, Andrew Coan offers a highly engaging look at the long, mostly forgotten history of special prosecutors in American politics. For more than a century, special prosecutors have struck fear into the hearts of presidents, who have the power to fire them at any time. How could this be, Coan asks? And how could the nation entrust such a high responsibility to such subordinate officials? With vivid storytelling and historical examples, Coan demonstrates that special prosecutors can do much to protect the rule of law under the right circumstances.

The volume reviews modern US Supreme Court landmark cases relating to the topic of abortion. Cases covered include Roe v. Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, Gonzales v. Carhart, and recent developments in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson and Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health. The book reviews the decisions and rationale of the Court and how it has evolved. The oral arguments and opinion announcements from key cases are also included.

Im Sommer 1948 stehen große Entscheidungen an: Die westlichen Alliierten beauftragen 65 Männer und Frauen damit, eine Verfassung auszuarbeiten. Monate leidenschaftlicher Diskussionen beginnen, in denen gestritten, getrickst und geträumt wird. Wie soll es werden, das neue Land? Kurz nachdem in den drei Westzonen im Frühsommer 1948 eine neue Währung eingeführt wird, riegelt die Sowjetunion West-Berlin ab: Die Stadt ist blockiert. Die USA beschließen, zwei Millionen Menschen aus der Luft zu versorgen und schicken "Rosinenbomber" los, von denen gleich einer der ersten abstürzt.

For two centuries, the Framers' ideas about political corruption flourished in the courts, even in the absence of clear rules governing voters, civil officers, and elected officials. In the 1970s, the U.S. Supreme Court began to narrow the definition of corruption, and the meaning has since changed dramatically. No case makes that clearer than Citizens United.

The Supreme Court's decisions on constitutional rights are well known and much talked about. But individuals who want to defend those rights need something else as well: access to courts that can rule on their complaints. And on matters of access, the Court's record over the past generation has been almost uniformly hostile to the enforcement of individual citizens' constitutional rights.

Over the last two decades, a fringe plan to call a convention under the Constitution's amendment mechanism—the nation's first ever—has inched through statehouses. Delegates, like those in Philadelphia two centuries ago, would exercise nearly unlimited authority to draft changes to our fundamental law, potentially altering anything from voting and free speech rights to regulatory and foreign policy powers. Such a watershed moment would present great danger, and for some, great power. In this important book, Feingold and Prindiville examine the grave risks inherent in this effort.

In this profoundly important reassessment of constitutional interpretation, the eminent legal philosopher Hadley Arkes argues that "originalism" alone is an inadequate answer to the judicial activism of the left. Without recourse to "mere Natural Law"—the moral principles knowable by all—our legal and constitutional system is doomed to incoherence. Brilliant in its analysis, essential in its argument, Mere Natural Law is a must-listen for everyone who cares about the Constitution, morality, and the rule of law.

In this original, far-reaching, and timely book, Justice Stephen Breyer examines the work of SCOTUS in an increasingly interconnected world, a world in which all sorts of public and private activity - from the conduct of national security policy to the conduct of international trade - obliges the Court to consider and understand circumstances beyond America's borders. At a time when ordinary citizens may book international lodging directly through online sites, it has become clear that judicial awareness can no longer stop at the water's edge.

En tiempos en que la (auto) ficción está al servicio de la cobardía, Eduardo Herrera nos ofrece su testimonio franco como un ex operador de la corrupción de cuello blanco...

For decades, James MacGregor Burns has been one of the great masters of the study of power and leadership in America. Now he turns his eye to an institution of government that he believes has become more powerful---and more partisan---than the Founding Fathers ever intended: the Supreme Court. Much as we would like to believe that the Court remains aloof from ideological politics, Packing the Court reveals how often justices behave like politicians in robes.

Originally published in 1748, this is possibly the most masterful and influential book ever written on the subject of liberty and justice. Accordingly, it is a work that profoundly influenced America’s Founding Fathers. Its success was due partly to the fact that it was the first systematic treatise on politics, partly to Montesquieu’s championship of the nobility and the Parlements, but above all, to the brilliant style of his prose.

Dr. Christine Montross has spent her career treating the most severely ill psychiatric patients. Several years ago, she set out to investigate why so many of her patients got caught up in the legal system when discharged from her care - and what happened to them therein. Waiting for an Echo is a riveting, rarely seen glimpse into American incarceration. It is also a damning account of policies that have criminalized mental illness, shifting large numbers of people who belong in therapeutic settings into punitive ones.

Americans revere the Constitution even as they argue fiercely over its original toleration of slavery. Some historians have charged that slaveholders actually enshrined human bondage at the nation's founding. The acclaimed political historian Sean Wilentz shares the dismay but sees the Constitution and slavery differently. Although the proslavery side won important concessions, he asserts, antislavery impulses also influenced the framers' work. Far from covering up a crime against humanity, the Constitution restricted slavery's legitimacy under the new national government.

During his 28-year career, Matthew Horace rose through the ranks from a police officer working the beat to a federal agent working criminal cases in some of the toughest communities in America to a highly decorated federal law enforcement executive managing high-profile investigations nationwide. Yet it was not until seven years into his service - when Horace found himself face down on the ground with a gun pointed at his head by a white fellow officer - that he fully understood the racism seething within America's police departments.