Is man truly the measure of all things? If so, then perhaps that very premise accounts for our nation's constitutional ills. In a wide-ranging study based on legal history, political theory, and philosophical concepts going all the way back to Plato, Robert Clinton seeks to challenge current faith in an activist judiciary. Claiming that a human-centered Constitution leads to government by reductive moral theory and illegitimate judicial review, he advocates a return to traditional jurisprudence and a God-centered Constitution grounded in English common law and its precedents. Building...
Is man truly the measure of all things? If so, then perhaps that very premise accounts for our nation's constitutional ills. In a wide-ranging stu...
Over the past century, attitudes toward juvenile crime have alternated between rehabilitation and crime control, and even now are being revised in response to increasing gang violence. But by the 1960s, it had become obvious that juvenile offenders were being deprived of fundamental rights, leading Supreme Court Justice Fortas to declare that "neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone." The Supreme Court and Juvenile Justice takes in a century of change to focus on how the Supreme Court brought the juvenile court system under constitutional...
Over the past century, attitudes toward juvenile crime have alternated between rehabilitation and crime control, and even now are being revised in res...
In Judging Democracy, Christopher Manfredi and Mark Rush challenge assertions that the Canadian and American Supreme Courts have taken radically different approaches to constitutional interpretation regarding general and democratic rights. Three case studies compare Canadian and American law concerning prisoners' voting rights, the scope and definition of voting rights, and campaign spending. These examples demonstrate that the two Supreme Courts have engaged in essentially the same debates concerning the franchise, access to the ballot, and the concept of a "meaningful" vote. They...
In Judging Democracy, Christopher Manfredi and Mark Rush challenge assertions that the Canadian and American Supreme Courts have taken radic...
The introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom in 1982 was accompanied by much fanfare and public debate, and the Charter remains the subject of controversy 25 years later. Contested Constitutionalism does not celebrate the Charter; it offers a critique by distinguished scholars of law and political science of its effect on democracy, judicial power, and the place of Quebec and Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Employing a diversity of methodological approaches, contributors explore three themes: Governance and institutions, policy making and the courts, and citizenship...
The introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom in 1982 was accompanied by much fanfare and public debate, and the Charter remains t...
