Taking the Constitution Away from the CourtsPrinceton University Press, 2000 M07 24 - 256 páginas Here a leading scholar in constitutional law, Mark Tushnet, challenges hallowed American traditions of judicial review and judicial supremacy, which allow U.S. judges to invalidate "unconstitutional" governmental actions. Many people, particularly liberals, have "warm and fuzzy" feelings about judicial review. They are nervous about what might happen to unprotected constitutional provisions in the chaotic worlds of practical politics and everyday life. By examining a wide range of situations involving constitutional rights, Tushnet vigorously encourages us all to take responsibility for protecting our liberties. Guarding them is not the preserve of judges, he maintains, but a commitment of the citizenry to define itself as "We the People of the United States." The Constitution belongs to us collectively, as we act in political dialogue with each other--whether in the street, in the voting booth, or in the legislature as representatives of others. |
Dentro del libro
Resultados 1-5 de 50
... Senate, Lincoln replied to Douglas's effort to defuse the slavery controversy by relying on the Court's decision. Douglas said that the courts were created “so that when you cannot agree among yourselves on a disputed point you appeal ...
... senator might have wanted to exercise Congress's power to “exercise exclusive Legislation” over the seat of government by abolishing slavery in the Dis- trict of Columbia. That power is different from the power to “make all needful ...
... senator supports such an amendment: The “principle” of Plyler is not obviously inconsistent with a national law restricting education in that way. But when Proposition 187 was adopted, and even through 1998, Congress has not enacted ...
Alcanzaste el límite de visualización de este libro.
Alcanzaste el límite de visualización de este libro.