What Roe V. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial DecisionJ. M. Balkin NYU Press, 2005 - 288 lappuses Constitutional scholars rewrite the landmark decision |
No grāmatas satura
1.–5. rezultāts no 23.
Atvainojiet, šīs lappuses saturs ir ierobežots..
Atvainojiet, šīs lappuses saturs ir ierobežots..
Atvainojiet, šīs lappuses saturs ir ierobežots..
Atvainojiet, šīs lappuses saturs ir ierobežots..
Atvainojiet, šīs lappuses saturs ir ierobežots..
Saturs
An Engine of Controversy | 3 |
Balkin judgment of the Court | 31 |
Reva B Siegel concurring | 63 |
Mark Tushnet concurring | 86 |
Allen concurring in the judgment | 92 |
Jed Rubenfeld concurring in the judgment except as to Doe | 109 |
Robin West concurring in the judgment | 121 |
Cass R Sunstein concurring in the judgment | 148 |
Jeffrey Rosen dissenting | 170 |
Teresa Stanton Collett dissenting | 187 |
Michael Stokes Paulsen dissenting | 196 |
Comments from the Contributors | 230 |
The Constitution of the United States of America | 261 |
About the Contributors | 275 |
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
What Roe V. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite ... Jack M Balkin Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2023 |
What Roe V. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite ... Jack M. Balkin Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2023 |
What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite ... Jack M. Balkin Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2023 |