Dissent and the Supreme Court: Its Role in the Court's History and the Nation's Constitutional Dialogue
Okt 2015 · Muuzaji: Vintage
Kitabu pepe
544
Kurasa
family_home
Kimetimiza masharti
info
Kuhusu kitabu pepe hiki
“Highly illuminating ... for anyone interested in the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and the American democracy, lawyer and layperson alike." —The Los Angeles Review of Books
In his major work, acclaimed historian and judicial authority Melvin Urofsky examines the great dissents throughout the Court’s long history. Constitutional dialogue is one of the ways in which we as a people reinvent and reinvigorate our democratic society. The Supreme Court has interpreted the meaning of the Constitution, acknowledged that the Court’s majority opinions have not always been right, and initiated a critical discourse about what a particular decision should mean before fashioning subsequent decisions—largely through the power of dissent.
Urofsky shows how the practice grew slowly but steadily, beginning with the infamous and now overturned case of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) during which Chief Justice Roger Taney’s opinion upheld slavery and ending with the present age of incivility, in which reasoned dialogue seems less and less possible. Dissent on the court and off, Urofsky argues in this major work, has been a crucial ingredient in keeping the Constitution alive and must continue to be so.
In his major work, acclaimed historian and judicial authority Melvin Urofsky examines the great dissents throughout the Court’s long history. Constitutional dialogue is one of the ways in which we as a people reinvent and reinvigorate our democratic society. The Supreme Court has interpreted the meaning of the Constitution, acknowledged that the Court’s majority opinions have not always been right, and initiated a critical discourse about what a particular decision should mean before fashioning subsequent decisions—largely through the power of dissent.
Urofsky shows how the practice grew slowly but steadily, beginning with the infamous and now overturned case of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) during which Chief Justice Roger Taney’s opinion upheld slavery and ending with the present age of incivility, in which reasoned dialogue seems less and less possible. Dissent on the court and off, Urofsky argues in this major work, has been a crucial ingredient in keeping the Constitution alive and must continue to be so.
Kuhusu mwandishi
MELVIN I. UROFSKY is a professor emeritus of history at Virginia Commonwealth University and was the chair of its history department. He is the editor (with David W. Levy) of the five-volume collection of Louis Brandeis’s letters, as well as the author of American Zionism from Herzl to the Holocaust and Louis D. Brandeis. He lives in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Kadiria kitabu pepe hiki
Tupe maoni yako.
Kusoma maelezo
Simu mahiri na kompyuta vibao
Sakinisha programu ya Vitabu vya Google Play kwa ajili ya Android na iPad au iPhone. Itasawazishwa kiotomatiki kwenye akaunti yako na kukuruhusu usome vitabu mtandaoni au nje ya mtandao popote ulipo.
Kompyuta za kupakata na kompyuta
Unaweza kusikiliza vitabu vilivyonunuliwa kwenye Google Play wakati unatumia kivinjari cha kompyuta yako.
Visomaji pepe na vifaa vingine
Ili usome kwenye vifaa vya wino pepe kama vile visomaji vya vitabu pepe vya Kobo, utahitaji kupakua faili kisha ulihamishie kwenye kifaa chako. Fuatilia maagizo ya kina ya Kituo cha Usaidizi ili uhamishe faili kwenye visomaji vya vitabu pepe vinavyotumika.
