By Professor Bruce Ackerman, Bruce Ackerman
The very best Court's intervention within the 2000 election will form American legislation and democracy lengthy after George W. Bush has left the White residence. This very important ebook brings jointly a huge variety of preeminent felony students who tackle the bigger questions raised by way of the ideally suited Court's activities. Did the Court's choice violate the rule of thumb of legislations? Did it inaugurate an period of super-politicized jurisprudence? How may still Bush v. Gore swap the phrases of dialogue over the following around of ideal court docket appointments? The contributors-Bruce Ackerman, Jack Balkin, Guido Calabresi, Steven Calabresi, Owen Fiss, Charles Fried, Robert submit, Margaret Jane Radin, Jeffrey Rosen, Jed Rubenfeld, Cass Sunstein, Laurence Tribe, and Mark Tushnet-represent a huge political spectrum. Their reactions to the case are diversified and fabulous, packed with glowing argument and lively debate. this can be a must-read ebook for considerate americans in every single place.
Read or Download Bush v. Gore: The Question of Legitimacy PDF
Best constitutional law books
The migration of constitutional principles throughout jurisdictions is among the critical positive factors of latest constitutional perform. The expanding use of comparative jurisprudence in studying constitutions is one instance of this. during this 2007 ebook, best figures within the research of comparative constitutionalism and comparative constitutional politics from North the United States, Europe and Australia talk about the dynamic approaches wherein constitutional structures effect one another.
A accomplished examine the commercial kinfolk between states, and the way they may be greater optimized. during this groundbreaking quantity, Joseph F. Zimmerman examines interstate monetary kinfolk. He explores the heritage of congressional and judicial flooring principles governing such relatives, direct and oblique interstate alternate boundaries and technique of their removing, and interstate festival for tax sales, enterprise corporations, activities franchises, travelers, and gamblers.
Many have argued lately that the U. S. constitutional process exalts person rights over duties, virtues, and the typical solid. Answering the costs opposed to liberal theories of rights, James Fleming and Linda McClain increase and safeguard a civic liberalism that takes duties and virtues—as good as rights—seriously.
This booklet explains a paradox in American constitutional legislations: how a correct no longer mentioned through the ratification debates at Philadelphia and never pointed out within the textual content has develop into a center section of sleek freedom. relatively, privateness is a constitutional afterthought that has received strength via smooth interpretations of an previous textual content.
- Arbitrary and Capricious: The Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the Death Penalty
- Wrong and Dangerous: Ten Right Wing Myths about Our Constitution
- Constitutional Literacy: A Twenty-First Century Imperative
- A More Perfect Constitution: Why the Constitution Must Be Revised: Ideas to Inspire a New Generation
- The Executive Unbound: After the Madisonian Republic
- Searching for the State in British Legal Thought: Competing Conceptions of the Public Sphere (Cambridge Studies in Constitutional Law)
Extra resources for Bush v. Gore: The Question of Legitimacy
But barely a decade later, the landscape had changed. In Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, I represented a minority political party challenging a state ban on ‘‘fusion’’ candidacies (in which two parties, usually a minor party and one of the two major parties, nominate the same candidate) that the major parties saw as threatening to their dominance; the Court’s 6–3 decision upholding the state’s power to assure political stability by preserving the shared hegemony of those two parties decisively awakened me to the drumbeat sounded by a cohesive Court majority:∞ Chief I am grateful to Bruce Ackerman, Mike Dorf, George Fletcher, Heather Gerkin, Dan Geyser, Tom Goldstein, Tara Grove, Pat Gudridge, Sam Issacharo√, Jonathan Massey, Joel Perwin, Rick Pildes, Ben Souede, and Scott Turow for helpful suggestions.
Kennedy had won the state’s election, not Richard M. ∞ So the December 12 deadline was not required by federal law. Did the Bush v. Gore majority say otherwise? No. The majority ruled that extending the count beyond December 12 would transgress state law (it would be ‘‘a violation of the Florida election code’’). But if the question was a matter of state law, how could the United States Supreme Court decide it? It couldn’t, and every single justice knew it. How, then, did the majority come up with a December 12 deadline?
They got 24 j e d r u b e n f e l d over it in a single sentence. ’’ If that’s not a clear embrace of a strict December 12 deadline, what is? ’’ On the basis of those words from the state supreme court—and that’s the exact and only quotation o√ered—the Bush v. Gore majority declared that the Florida justices had authoritatively read Florida law to call for a ﬁnal vote count by the federal safe-harbor date of December 12. Readers quite probably will not believe me. They will think that there must be something more in the majority’s opinion on this point.