Reconsidering Judicial Finality Why the Supreme Court Is Not the Last Word on the Constitution
Afbeeldingen
Sla de afbeeldingen overArtikel vergelijken
Auteur:
Louis Fisher
- Engels
- Hardcover
- 9780700628100
- 30 augustus 2019
- 288 pagina's
Samenvatting
Reminds us of the ""unalterable fact"", as Chief Justice Rehnquist once remarked, ""that our judicial system, like the human beings who administer it, is fallible."" And a Court inevitably prone to miscalculation and error, as this book clearly demonstrates, cannot have the incontrovertible last word on constitutional questions.
Federal judges, legal scholars, pundits, and reporters frequently describe the Supreme Court as the final word on the meaning of the Constitution. The historical record presents an entirely different picture. A close and revealing reading of that record, from 1789 to the present day, Reconsidering Judicial Finality reminds us of the “unalterable fact,” as Chief Justice Rehnquist once remarked, “that our judicial system, like the human beings who administer it, is fallible.” And a Court inevitably prone to miscalculation and error, as this book clearly demonstrates, cannot have the incontrovertible last word on constitutional questions.
In this deeply researched, sharply reasoned work of legal myth-busting, constitutional scholar Louis Fisher explains how constitutional disputes are Settled by all three branches of government, and by the general public, with the Supreme Court often playing a secondary role. The Court’s decisions have, of course, been challenged and reversed in numerous cases—involving slavery, civil rights, child labor legislation, Japanese internment during World War II, abortion, and religious liberty. What Fisher shows us on a case-by-case basis is how the elected branches, scholars, and American public regularly press policies contrary to Court rulings—and regularly prevail, although the process might sometimes take decades. From the common misreading of Marbury v. Madison, to the mistaken understanding of the Supreme Court as the trusted guardian of individual rights, to the questionable assumptions of the Court's decision in Citizens United, Fisher’s work charts the distance and the difference between the Court as the ultimate arbiter in constitutional matters and the judgment of history.
The verdict of Reconsidering Judicial Finality is clear: to treat the Supreme Court’s nine justices as democracy’s last hope or as dangerous activists undermining democracy is to vest them with undue significance. The Constitution belongs to all three branches of government—and, finally, to the American people.
Federal judges, legal scholars, pundits, and reporters frequently describe the Supreme Court as the final word on the meaning of the Constitution. The historical record presents an entirely different picture. A close and revealing reading of that record, from 1789 to the present day, Reconsidering Judicial Finality reminds us of the “unalterable fact,” as Chief Justice Rehnquist once remarked, “that our judicial system, like the human beings who administer it, is fallible.” And a Court inevitably prone to miscalculation and error, as this book clearly demonstrates, cannot have the incontrovertible last word on constitutional questions.
In this deeply researched, sharply reasoned work of legal myth-busting, constitutional scholar Louis Fisher explains how constitutional disputes are Settled by all three branches of government, and by the general public, with the Supreme Court often playing a secondary role. The Court’s decisions have, of course, been challenged and reversed in numerous cases—involving slavery, civil rights, child labor legislation, Japanese internment during World War II, abortion, and religious liberty. What Fisher shows us on a case-by-case basis is how the elected branches, scholars, and American public regularly press policies contrary to Court rulings—and regularly prevail, although the process might sometimes take decades. From the common misreading of Marbury v. Madison, to the mistaken understanding of the Supreme Court as the trusted guardian of individual rights, to the questionable assumptions of the Court's decision in Citizens United, Fisher’s work charts the distance and the difference between the Court as the ultimate arbiter in constitutional matters and the judgment of history.
The verdict of Reconsidering Judicial Finality is clear: to treat the Supreme Court’s nine justices as democracy’s last hope or as dangerous activists undermining democracy is to vest them with undue significance. The Constitution belongs to all three branches of government—and, finally, to the American people.
Productspecificaties
Wij vonden geen specificaties voor jouw zoekopdracht '{SEARCH}'.
Inhoud
- Taal
- en
- Bindwijze
- Hardcover
- Oorspronkelijke releasedatum
- 30 augustus 2019
- Aantal pagina's
- 288
- Illustraties
- Nee
Betrokkenen
- Hoofdauteur
- Louis Fisher
- Hoofduitgeverij
- University Press Of Kansas
Overige kenmerken
- Extra groot lettertype
- Nee
- Product breedte
- 152 mm
- Product lengte
- 229 mm
- Studieboek
- Nee
- Verpakking breedte
- 152 mm
- Verpakking hoogte
- 229 mm
- Verpakking lengte
- 229 mm
- Verpakkingsgewicht
- 595 g
EAN
- EAN
- 9780700628100
Je vindt dit artikel in
- Categorieën
- Boek, ebook of luisterboek?
- Boek
- Taal
- Engels
- Beschikbaarheid
- Leverbaar
- Land
- Verenigde Staten
Kies gewenste uitvoering
Kies je bindwijze
(2)
Prijsinformatie en bestellen
De prijs van dit product is 47 euro en 99 cent. De meest getoonde prijs is 61 euro. Je bespaart 21%.
Je bespaart 21%
2 - 3 weken
Verkoop door bol
- Prijs inclusief verzendkosten, verstuurd door bol
- Ophalen bij een bol afhaalpunt mogelijk
- 30 dagen bedenktijd en gratis retourneren
- Dag en nacht klantenservice
Rapporteer dit artikel
Je wilt melding doen van illegale inhoud over dit artikel:
- Ik wil melding doen als klant
- Ik wil melding doen als autoriteit of trusted flagger
- Ik wil melding doen als partner
- Ik wil melding doen als merkhouder
Geen klant, autoriteit, trusted flagger, merkhouder of partner? Gebruik dan onderstaande link om melding te doen.