John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme CourtLSU Press, 2007. gada 1. apr. - 511 lappuses John Marshall (1755--1835) was arguably the most important judicial figure in American history. As the fourth chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, serving from 1801 to1835, he helped move the Court from the fringes of power to the epicenter of constitutional government. His great opinions in cases like Marbury v. Madison and McCulloch v. Maryland are still part of the working discourse of constitutional law in America. Drawing on a new and definitive edition of Marshall's papers, R. Kent Newmyer combines engaging narrative with new historiographical insights in a fresh interpretation of John Marshall's life in the law. More than the summation of Marshall's legal and institutional accomplishments, Newmyer's impressive study captures the nuanced texture of the justice's reasoning, the complexity of his mature jurisprudence, and the affinities and tensions between his system of law and the transformative age in which he lived. It substantiates Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s view of Marshall as the most representative figure in American law. |
No grāmatas satura
1.–5. rezultāts no 81.
... justice of the nation's highest appellate court, he was concerned that his opinions, and the Court's decisions, added up to a coherent body of rules and principles for the guidance of lower federal courts, for state courts in many ...
... decision—one that illustrates the linkage between the actual fighting of the Revolution and the constitutional ideas that emerged from it—was to take up arms for America. Marshall never explained his radical decision to support the ...
... decision making than he otherwise would have done. In big things as well as small, his concern was to make life secure for his children and comfortable and entertaining for Polly. There were gloves for her hands, ribbons for her hair ...
... decision of the Court of Appeals to his clients in Hite v. Fairfax he already had some reason to doubt—that the whole matter of quitrents and title would be settled fairly and equitably by “our State Courts.” Then realizing that the new ...
... judicial review, they had only to read Hamilton's Federalist 78 or, on the Anti-Federalist side, Robert Yates's “Letters of Brutus,” the most compelling contemporary ... Court's decision in such a case would be binding on Congress, or only.
Saturs
CHAPTER THREE | |
CHAPTER FOUR | |
CHAPTER FIVE | |
CHAPTER | |
CHAPTER SEVEN | |
EPILOGUE | |
Essay on the Sources | |
List of Cases | |
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court R. Kent Newmyer Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2007 |
John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court R. Kent Newmyer Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2001 |
John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court R. Kent Newmyer Ierobežota priekšskatīšana - 2007 |