Download Free On Democracys Doorstep Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online On Democracys Doorstep and write the review.

Winner of the Henry Adams Prize from the Society for History in the Federal Government A Washington Post Notable Work of Nonfiction A Slate Best Book of 2014 The inside story of the Supreme Court decisions that brought true democracy to the United States As chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Earl Warren is most often remembered for landmark rulings in favor of desegregation and the rights of the accused. But Warren himself identified a lesser known group of cases—Baker v. Carr, Reynolds v. Sims, and their companions—as his most important work. J. Douglas Smith's On Democracy's Doorstep masterfully recounts the tumultuous and often overlooked events that established the principle of "one person, one vote" in the United States. Before the Warren Court acted, American democracy was in poor order. As citizens migrated to urban areas, legislative boundaries remained the same, giving rural lawmakers from sparsely populated districts disproportionate political power—a power they often used on behalf of influential business interests. Smith shows how activists ranging from city boosters in Tennessee to the League of Women Voters worked to end malapportionment, incurring the wrath of chambers of commerce and southern segregationists as they did so. Despite a conspiracy of legislative inaction and a 1946 Supreme Court decision that instructed the judiciary not to enter the "political thicket," advocates did not lose hope. As Smith shows, they skillfully used the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause to argue for radical judicial intervention. Smith vividly depicts the unfolding drama as Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy pressed for change, Solicitor General Archibald Cox cautiously held back, young clerks pushed the justices toward ever-bolder reform, and the powerful Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen obsessively sought to reverse the judicial revolution that had upended state governments from California to Virginia. Today, following the Court's recent controversial decisions on voting rights and campaign finance, the battles described in On Democracy's Doorstep have increasing relevance. With erudition and verve, Smith illuminates this neglected episode of American political history and confronts its profound consequences.
The famous Tip O'Neill axiom "all politics is local" comes alive in this chronicle of Democrat James H. Read's hard-fought but unsuccessful--by 98 votes--bid for state legislature in the socially conservative communities of Stearns and Morrison Counties, Minnesota. Read door-knocked 7,500 households during his campaign, visiting with voters and engaging in genuine dialogue on doorsteps from St. Anthony to St. Joseph. At once a memoir of a hard-fought contest and a meditation on the state of American democracy, Read's work contrasts the modern media-driven political campaign, where candidates glean their knowledge of voters from pollsters and communication only flows one way, with the kind of true understanding of constituents and issues that can only grow from individual encounters. Face-to-face doorstep conversations, he claims, give a candidate (or volunteer) and voter an opportunity to truly persuade and learn from one another. In a district where the pro-life movement dominated politics, Read's invitation to honestly discuss abortion and reject single-issue politics resonated with many voters. Refusing the "red state" versus "blue state" view of American voters, Doorstep Democracy shows the power and importance of kitchen-table politics--people sitting down together to tackle the issues that affect us--and proves that voters and candidates can be convinced to change their minds. Read ultimately demonstrates how conversations between citizens concerned about their communities can get us beyond the television ads, mass mailings, and sound bites to rejuvenate American democracy.
For nearly as long as there have been electoral districts in America, politicians have gerrymandered those districts. Though the practice has changed over time, the public reaction to it has remained the same: gerrymandering is reviled. There is, of course, good reason for that sentiment. Gerrymandering is intended to maximize the number of legislative seats for one party. As such, it is an attempt to gain what appears to be an unfair advantage in elections. Nevertheless, gerrymandering is not well understood by most people and this lack of understanding leads to a false sense that there are easy solutions to this complex problem. Gerrymandering: The Politics of Redistricting in the United States unpacks the complicated process of gerrymandering, reflecting upon the normative issues to which it gives rise. Tracing the history of partisan gerrymandering from its nineteenth-century roots to the present day, the book explains its legal status and implementation, its consequences, and possible options for reform. The result is a balanced analysis of gerrymandering that acknowledges its troubling aspects while recognizing that, as long as district boundaries have to be drawn, there is no perfect way to do so.
On cover, the word "right" has an x drawn over the letter "r" with the letter "f" above it.
Between 1956 and 1967, justice was for sale in Oklahoma’s highest court and Supreme Court decisions went to the highest bidder. One lawyer, O. A. Cargill, grew rich peddling influence with the justices; a shady company, Selected Investments, protected its illegal practices with bribes; and Supreme Court justice N. S. Corn, one of two justices who would ultimately serve time in prison, cheated his partners in crime and stashed vast amounts of ill-gotten cash in a locker at his golf course. Author Lee Card, himself a former judge, describes a system infected with favoritism and partisanship in which party loyalty trumped fairness and a shaky payment structure built on commissions invited exploitation. From petty corruption at the lowest level of the trial bench to large-scale bribery among Supreme Court justices, Card follows the developing scandal, introducing the bit players and worst offenders, the federal prosecutors who exposed the scheme, and the politicians who persuaded skeptical Oklahoma voters to adopt constitutional reforms. On one level,The Best Courts Money Could Buy is a compelling story of true crime and punishment set in the capitol of an agricultural, oil-producing, conservative state. But on a deeper level, the book is a cautionary tale of political corruption—and the politics of restoring integrity, accountability, and honor to a broken system.
An incisive study that shows how Republicans transformed the US House of Representatives into a consistent GOP stronghold—with or without a majority. Long-term Democratic dominance in the US House of Representatives gave way to a Republican electoral advantage and frequently held majority following the GOP takeover in 1994. Republicans haven’t always held the majority in recent decades, but nationalization, partisan realignment, and the gerrymandering of House seats have contributed to a political climate in which they've had an edge more often than not for nearly thirty years. The Long Red Thread examines each House election cycle from 1964 to 2020, surveying academic and journalistic literature to identify key trends and takeaways from more than a half-century of US House election results in order to predict what Americans can expect to see in the future.
As poor and working people organized themselves on the job, in the streets, and at the polls during the mid-twentieth century, they forced Republicans to reckon with new demands for political and social citizenship in big cities across the Northeast, Midwest, and Pacific Coast. While rightwing Republicans mobilized to crush those movements, Making Republicans Liberal explores how another wing of the party responded to intensifying mass movement pressure. Beginning in the 1930s, Republican governors such as Earl Warren of California, George Romney of Michigan, and Nelson Rockefeller of New York spent the next four decades articulating their own vision of liberalism. These Republican liberals believed that strategically they could not win elections and govern in places where unions, civil rights groups, and other social movements organized voters. What may have begun as an opportunistic strategy soon mutated into an ideological commitment to use state power to realize working people’s demands for a greater say, and stake, in the decisions governing their lives. Republican liberals accepted labor’s right to organize, legislated antidiscrimination laws, and legalized abortion. Yet at the same time, each of those policies proved weaker than the alternatives supported by organized labor or mainline civil rights groups and paled in comparison to what people on strike and on the march really wanted. Kristoffer Smemo shows how this was the contradiction of Republican liberalism as a policy program and as an ideology. The reforms it ushered in at once asked too much from core, conservative Republican constituencies and offered too little to the movements struggling for change. As the movements making Republicans compromise fragmented and collapsed in the late twentieth century, so too did the material foundation for Republican liberalism.
The Harvard Law Review, April 2015, is offered in a digital edition. Contents include the annual Developments in the Law survey of a particular area of legal concern; this year's topic is Policing. Other contents include: • Article, "Consent Procedures and American Federalism," by Bridget Fahey • Essay, "Anticipatory Remedies for Takings," by Thomas W. Merrill • Book Review, "How a 'Lawless' China Made Modern America: An Epic Told in Orientalism," by Carol G.S. Tan Specific subjects studied in Developments in the Law—Policing are: Policing and Profit, Policing Students, Policing Immigrant Communities, and Considering Police Body Cameras. In addition, the issue features student commentary on Recent Cases, including such subjects as: the business judgment rule and mergers; whistleblowing under Dodd-Frank and extraterritoriality; senate redistricting in New York; postmortem rights of publicity; standing and overlap of various tests used; informing one who pleads No Contest of collateral consequences; exceptions to New York marriage license requirement for out-of-state marriages; exclusionary rule for violations of Posse Comitatus restrictions; and extending federal forced labor statute to conduct criminalized under state law. Finally, the issue features several summaries of Recent Publications. The Harvard Law Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. The Review comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2500 pages per volume. The organization is formally independent of the Harvard Law School. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions. This issue of the Review is Apr. 2015, the 6th issue of academic year 2014-2015 (Volume 128). The digital edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper ebook and Bluebook formatting.
Winner of the Anne B. & James B. McMillan Prize in Southern History Examines the legacies of eight momentous US Supreme Court decisions that have their origins in Alabama legal disputes Unknown to many, Alabama has played a remarkable role in a number of Supreme Court rulings that continue to touch the lives of every American. In Alabama Justice: The Cases and Faces That Changed a Nation, Steven P. Brown has identified eight landmark cases that deal with religion, voting rights, libel, gender discrimination, and other issues, all originating from legal disputes in Alabama. Written in a concise and accessible manner, each case law chapter begins with the circumstances that created the dispute. Brown then provides historical and constitutional background for the issue followed by a review of the path of litigation. Excerpts from the Court's ruling in the case are also presented, along with a brief account of the aftermath and significance of the decision. The First Amendment (New York Times v. Sullivan), racial redistricting (Gomillion v. Lightfoot), the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Frontiero v. Richardson), and prayer in public schools (Wallace v. Jaffree) are among the pivotal issues stamped indelibly by disputes with their origins in Alabama legal, political, and cultural landscapes. In addition to his analysis of cases, Brown discusses the three associate justices sent from Alabama to the Supreme Court--John McKinley, John Archibald Campbell, and Hugo Black--whose cumulative influence on the institution of the Court, constitutional interpretation, and the day-to-day rights and liberties enjoyed by every American is impossible to measure. A closing chapter examines the careers and contributions of these three Alabamians.