Showing titles in Judicial Systems

Engaging but caustic and openly ideological, Antonin Scalia was among the most influential justices ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court. In this fascinating new book, legal scholar Richard L. Hasen assesses Scalia's complex legacy as a conservative legal thinker and disruptive public intellectual. The left saw Scalia as an unscrupulous foe who amplified his judicial role with scathing dissents and outrageous public comments.

Today's Supreme Court justices bristle at the label "politicians in robes," insisting that they operate above the fray of partisan politics. But for the first century of the nation's history, the Court was unmistakably a political institution, both by design and in practice. Justices were fully...

The legal system was not designed for poor people. Yet, we ask citizens to use this system every day in spite of its shortcomings. If you have been sued or need to sue to seek legal redress, this book is for you. It will guide you through some of what to expect, and further explain why the system does not render justice every day.

Inside Strafprozess. Täglich sollen sie den moralischen Verfall unserer Gesellschaft verhindern, doch wie finden Richter zu ihrem Urteil? Und mit welchen Herausforderungen sind sie dabei konfrontiert? Strafrichter Patrick Burow gewährt seltene Einblicke in den Gerichtssaal. "Auf hoher See und vor Gericht ist dein Leben in Gottes Hand", weiß der Volksmund. Doch wie denkt und arbeitet ein Richter? Und wie findet er zu einem gerechten Urteil ? Spiegel-Bestseller-Autor Patrick Burow ist Richter aus Leidenschaft. In seinem neuen Buch blickt er hinter die Kulissen deutscher Gerichte.

The Mueller Report was a catastrophe for the malevolent forces desperate to impeach President Donald Trump. It failed to prove any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Since then, many of the President's former advisors and associates have been subjected to vindictive, political prosecutions for a variety of trivial, unrelated offenses. Roger Stone is one of them. In this moving, eyewitness account of Stone's trial and his decades-long career of political chicanery, author and Stone intimate Milo Yiannopoulos introduces America to the man behind the myth.

Every liberal democracy has laws or codes against hate speech - except the United States. For constitutionalists, regulation of hate speech violates the First Amendment and damages a free society. Against this absolutist view, Jeremy Waldron argues powerfully that hate speech should be regulated as part of our commitment to human dignity and to inclusion and respect for members of vulnerable minorities.

In January 1982, an elderly white widow was found brutally murdered in the small town of Greenwood, South Carolina. Police immediately arrested Edward Lee Elmore, a semiliterate, mentally retarded black man with no previous felony record. His only connection to the victim was having cleaned her gutters and windows, but barely ninety days after the victim’s body was found, he was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. Elmore had been on death row for eleven years when a young attorney named Diana Holt first learned of his case.

The sudden passing of Justice Antonin Scalia shook America. After almost 30 years on the Supreme Court, Scalia had become as integral to the institution as the hallowed room in which he sat. His wisecracking interruptions during oral arguments, his unmatched legal wisdom, his unwavering dedication to the Constitution, and his blistering dissents defined his leadership role on the court and inspired new generations of policymakers and legal minds.

NATIONAL BESTSELLER “Shows us why Sandra Day O’Connor is so compelling as a human being and so vital as a public thinker.”—Michael Beschloss In this remarkable book, Sandra Day O’Connor explores the law, her life as a Supreme Court Justice, and how the Court has evolved and...

A behind-the-scenes look at the powerful courts that decide when international trade is legal or not. Does their rise mark a huge boon for corporations to challenge the power of sovereign nation-states? International trade deals have become vastly complex documents, seeking to govern everything...

We are all familiar with the image of the immensely clever judge who discerns the best rule of common law for the case at hand. But is this common-law mindset, which is appropriate in its place, suitable also in statutory and constitutional interpretation? In a witty and trenchant essay, Justice Scalia answers this question with a resounding negative. 

Collaborative divorce is an option for divorce outside of court that minimizes conflict, improves family relations and co-parenting, give couples more say in the outcome of their settlement and prevents the costs and stress associated with a court trial. However, for collaborative divorce to be effective a thorough understanding of the process, the misconceptions, and risks involved are needed to ensure a kinder, more collaborative outcome.

America's criminal justice system is among the deadliest and most racist in the world and it disproportionally targets Black Americans, who are also disproportionately poor, hungry, houseless, jobless, sick, and poorly educated. By every metric of misery, this nation does not act like Black Lives Matter. In order to break out of the trap of racialized mass incarceration and relentless racial oppression, we, as a society, need to rethink our basic assumptions about blame and punishment.

In Material Law, distinguished scholar John Brigham focuses on the places where law and material life intersect, and how law creates and alters our social reality. Brigham looks at an eclectic group of bodies and things - from maps and territories and trends in courthouse architecture to a woman's womb and a judge's body - to make connections between the material and the legal.

From the nation's most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer comes a "dazzling and stimulating" exploration of how the creation of the ten commandments provides the origins to today's law (Library Journal). Alan Dershowitz is one of America's most famous litigation experts. In the Genesis of...

A growing chorus of officials and commentators argues that the Supreme Court has become too political. On this view, the confirmation process is just an exercise in partisan agenda-setting, and the jurists are no more than “politicians in robes” - their ostensibly neutral judicial philosophies mere camouflage for conservative or liberal convictions. 

Constitutional originalism stakes law to history. The theory's core tenet—that the United States Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning—has us decide questions of modern constitutional law by consulting the distant constitutional past. Yet originalist engagement with history is often deeply problematic. In this comprehensive and novel critique of originalism, Jonathan Gienapp targets originalists' unspoken assumptions about the Constitution and its history.

Over the last 30 years, the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies has grown from a small group of disaffected conservative law students into an organization with extraordinary influence over American law and politics. Although the organization is unknown to the average citizen, this group of intellectuals has managed to monopolize the selection of federal judges, take over the Department of Justice, and control legal policy in the White House.

In Tough Cases, judges from different kinds of courts in different parts of the country write about the case that proved most difficult for them to decide. Some of these cases received international attention: the Elián González case in which Judge Jennifer Bailey had to decide whether to return a seven-year-old boy to his father in Cuba after his mother drowned trying to bring the child to the United States, or the Terri Schiavo case in which Judge George Greer had to decide whether to withdraw life support from a woman in a vegetative state over the wishes of her parents.

When two parties meet in court, the outcome is rarely preordained. Judges must figure out who wins and who loses by analyzing the facts of the case before them and applying the legal principles of cases that have come before. How Would You Rule? brings that experience alive by presenting you with the critical facts and rules in 31 of the law's most interesting cases and inviting you to test your legal wits and sharpen your legal judgment by figuring out how these challenging cases should be decided.