The Democratic ConstitutionOxford University Press, 2004. gada 26. aug. - 320 lappuses Constitutional law is clearly shaped by judicial actors. But who else contributes? Scholars in the past have recognized that the legislative branch plays a significant role in determining structural issues, such as separation of powers and federalism, but stopped there--claiming that only courts had the independence and expertise to safeguard individual and minority rights. In this readable and engaging narrative, the authors identify the nuts and bolts of the national dialogue and relate succinct examples of how elected officials and the general public often dominate the Supreme Court in defining the Constitution's meaning. Making use of case studies on race, privacy, federalism, war powers, speech, and religion, Devins and Fisher demonstrate how elected officials uphold individual rights in such areas as religious liberty and free speech as well as, and often better than, the courts. This fascinating debunking of judicial supremacy argues that nonjudicial contributions to constitutional interpretation make the Constitution more stable, more consistent with constitutional principles, and more protective of individual and minority rights. |
No grāmatas satura
1.–5. rezultāts no 70.
vii. lappuse
... work is grounded in concrete examples, revealing the work of interest groups, the color of legislative debate, and strategies within the executive branch.6 vii We have published many books and articles that prepare us.
... work is grounded in concrete examples, revealing the work of interest groups, the color of legislative debate, and strategies within the executive branch.6 vii We have published many books and articles that prepare us.
3. lappuse
... example, when reporting that six out of ten Americans thought the Supreme Court was the ultimate constitutional arbiter, newspapers simply noted that these six were “correct.”1 Likewise, journalists and academics alike expressed outrage ...
... example, when reporting that six out of ten Americans thought the Supreme Court was the ultimate constitutional arbiter, newspapers simply noted that these six were “correct.”1 Likewise, journalists and academics alike expressed outrage ...
6. lappuse
... example), the elected branches support Court decision making and, in so doing, encourage the Justices to provide additional constitutional safeguards. At other times, however, the Court yields to public criticism. Witness, for example ...
... example), the elected branches support Court decision making and, in so doing, encourage the Justices to provide additional constitutional safeguards. At other times, however, the Court yields to public criticism. Witness, for example ...
10. lappuse
... example, former federal judge Robert H. Bork wrote in 1990, “The Constitution is the trump card in American politics, and judges decide what the Constitution means. When the Supreme Court invokes the Constitution, whether legitimately ...
... example, former federal judge Robert H. Bork wrote in 1990, “The Constitution is the trump card in American politics, and judges decide what the Constitution means. When the Supreme Court invokes the Constitution, whether legitimately ...
11. lappuse
... example, rather than decide for itself whether the measure is constitutional, it includes in the statute an expedited procedure to permit quick challenges in the courts. Congress resorted to that practice four times from 1985 to 1996 ...
... example, rather than decide for itself whether the measure is constitutional, it includes in the statute an expedited procedure to permit quick challenges in the courts. Congress resorted to that practice four times from 1985 to 1996 ...
Saturs
3 | |
9 | |
2 Who Participates? | 29 |
3 Federalism | 53 |
4 Separation of Powers | 77 |
5 The War Power | 103 |
6 Privacy | 127 |
7 Race | 149 |
8 Speech | 173 |
9 Religion | 195 |
10 The Ongoing Dialogue | 217 |
Notes | 241 |
Case Index | 289 |
Subject Index | 297 |
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
1st Sess abortion administration affirmative action American appointments approved argued Att’y Gen Attorney authority bill Bork brief Bush challenge Chief Justice civil rights Clinton Commerce Clause Cong congressional constitutional amendment constitutional interpretation constitutional law constitutionality Court rulings Court’s debate decided declared Democrats desegregation disputes doctrine Dred Scott Earl Warren Education efforts elected branches elected government elected officials enacted example executive federal courts flag framers freedom independent counsel interest groups issue judges judicial review judicial supremacy Justice Department lawmakers legislative veto limited litigation Louis Fisher members of Congress ment military Nixon peyote pocket veto President presidential protections Public Papers Reagan recess appointments regulation Rehnquist rejected Republican resolution role Ruth Bader Ginsburg school desegregation school prayer separation of powers speech Stat statute statutory Supreme Court decisions tion tional U.S. Supreme Court unconstitutional United upheld War Powers Resolution Warren Washington Post White House