Download Free This Honorable Court Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online This Honorable Court and write the review.

Tribe's new book takes on William Rehnquist, senators seeking a precise litmus test for judicial appointments, champions of judicial restraint, and, sub silentio, Edwin Meese. His study of the political history of High Court appointees demolishes several claims.g., that one justice cannot make a difference in judicial proceedings and myths that of ``strict constructionism,'' with Tribe insisting that literal adherence to the constitutional text abdicates judicial responsibility. So, too, he finds, does the inevitably inconclusive inquiry into the Framers' intent. Then there is the myth of the ``spineless Senate,'' which, he shows, is anything but the case. Tribe's respect for the Court's power is boundless; not that he is uncritical, but he does appreciate its extraordinary influence, and, given it, argues that Senate and nation must subject each nominee to the closest scrutiny. This tightly argued appeal can be readily followed by nonlawyers. It should be heeded. Milton Cantor, History Dept., Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst - Library Journal.
“Vivid…Barron has given us a rich and detailed history.” —The New York Times Book Review “Ambitious...a deep history and a thoughtful inquiry into how the constitutional system of checks and balances has functioned when it comes to waging war and making peace.” —The Washington Post A timely account of a raging debate: The history of the ongoing struggle between the presidents and Congress over who has the power to declare and wage war. The Constitution states that it is Congress that declares war, but it is the presidents who have more often taken us to war and decided how to wage it. In Waging War, David J. Barron opens with an account of George Washington and the Continental Congress over Washington’s plan to burn New York City before the British invasion. Congress ordered him not to, and he obeyed. Barron takes us through all the wars that followed: 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American war, World Wars One and Two, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and now, most spectacularly, the War on Terror. Congress has criticized George W. Bush for being too aggressive and Barack Obama for not being aggressive enough, but it avoids a vote on the matter. By recounting how our presidents have declared and waged wars, Barron shows that these executives have had to get their way without openly defying Congress. Waging War shows us our country’s revered and colorful presidents at their most trying times—Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Johnson, both Bushes, and Obama. Their wars have made heroes of some and victims of others, but most have proved adept at getting their way over reluctant or hostile Congresses. The next president will face this challenge immediately—and the Constitution and its fragile system of checks and balances will once again be at the forefront of the national debate.
The Making and Measure of a Judge - Biography of the Honorable Sammie Chess, Jr. is the definitive biography of North Carolina's first African American Superior Court Judge. It is a vivid historical journey of Chess's humble beginning on the dirt floor of a tenant dwelling, in the midst of the Great Depression, in rural South Carolina. Chess's journey continues through the Jim Crow era and the civil rights struggle as a civil rights attorney, and his rise to an outstanding Superior Court judge, Administrative Law judge, mentor and public servant. The book contains many lessons on how one should conduct themselves as lawyers and judges, and more importantly, many lessons on how to live one's life. When asked how he was able to rise above all he had experienced first-hand of the segregated south and set aside any personally biases he might have, without hesitation, Chess responded: "You treat people the way you want to be treated, not the way you are treated. I didn't let them set my standards. If a Klan member can bring you to his level, then you are not well rooted." Chess lived by a moral compass that lead him to dispense equal justice under law for all, irrespective of race or any other status in life. Undoubtedly, Chess reminds all of us of one of the greatest lessons one can learn in life: "With perseverance we can achieve."
How do Supreme Court justices decide their cases? Do they follow their policy preferences? Or are they constrained by the law and by other political actors? The Constrained Court combines new theoretical insights and extensive data analysis to show that law and politics together shape the behavior of justices on the Supreme Court. Michael Bailey and Forrest Maltzman show how two types of constraints have influenced the decision making of the modern Court. First, Bailey and Maltzman document that important legal doctrines, such as respect for precedents, have influenced every justice since 1950. The authors find considerable variation in how these doctrines affect each justice, variation due in part to the differing experiences justices have brought to the bench. Second, Bailey and Maltzman show that justices are constrained by political factors. Justices are not isolated from what happens in the legislative and executive branches, and instead respond in predictable ways to changes in the preferences of Congress and the president. The Constrained Court shatters the myth that justices are unconstrained actors who pursue their personal policy preferences at all costs. By showing how law and politics interact in the construction of American law, this book sheds new light on the unique role that the Supreme Court plays in the constitutional order.
An assessment of how the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts is significantly influencing the nation's laws and reinterpreting the Constitution includes in-depth analysis of recent rulings and their implications.
“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.