Contributions in Legal Studies – serie

This study analyzes the process of constitutional interpretation, that is, the methodology by which the Supreme Court goes about interpreting the Constitution, and offers a comprehensive view of constitutional law through the lens of history, political science, and jurisprudence. Shaman examines the practice of creating meaning for the Constitution, the dichotomy of legal formalism and realism, the levels of judicial scrutiny, the perception of reality, and the puzzle of legislative motive. While the book traces the historical development of constitutional law, its main focus is on modern jurisprudence, including analyses of the major themes of constitutional interpretation developed by the Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Courts.Shaman details the Warren Court's move to a more realistic jurisprudence and its development of a multi-level system of judicial review that has become increasingly more complex under the Burger and Rehnquist Courts. He critiques the Supreme Court's reversion in recent years to an old-fashioned formalistic jurisprudence and the growing tendency of the Court to look to the past rather than to future to interpret the Constitution. The book also includes discussion of recent major doctrinal developments such as constitutional theory underlying Supreme Court decisions on gender discrimination, discrimination on the basis of sexual preference, the right to die, abortion, and freedom of speech.

In recent decades the Ninth Amendment, a provision designed to clarify that the federal government was to be one of enumerated and limited powers, has been turned into an unenumerated rights clause that effectively grants unlimited power to the judiciary. Was this the intent of the framers of the Constitution? McAffee argues that the founders had a rather different set of priorities than ours, and that the goal of enforcing fundamental human rights was not why they drafted any of the first ten amendments. They did not intend to grant to the courts the power to generate fundamental rights, whether by reference to custom or history, reason or natural law, or societal values or consensus.It has become increasingly popular to identify our constitutional order as an experiment in the protection of fundamental human rights and to forget that it is also an experiment in self-government. As fundamental as the founding generation believed basic rights to be, they saw popular authority to make decisions about government as being even more central to the project in which they were engaged. They supported natural law and rights, but they felt strongly that those rights did not bind the people or their government unless they were inserted in the written Constitution. They did not contemplate that there would be unwritten limitations on the powers granted to government.

As the nation turned its back on Reconstruction, the Supreme Court in turn narrowed Thirteenth-, Fourteenth-, and Fifteenth-Amendment protections of former slaves, thus straying from the understanding of the amendments' framers. Tracking a long line of cases that employed narrow constructions of these amendments and accompanying statutes, this study compares the Court's propositions to the framers' own interpretations. The resulting portrait makes it clear that the Court contributed in a significant way to the nation's retreat from Reconstruction. Before analyzing the relevant cases, Scaturro provides a historical synopsis of the collapse of Reconstruction. The final section demonstrates how the twentieth-century Court handed down decisions that accommodated the demands of the Civil Rights Movement, but did so with constitutional interpretations that preserved several misunderstandings about the Reconstruction Amendments, especially the Fourteenth.This study helps to resolve a contemporary dilemma regarding the consequences of the Court's narrowing of the Interstate Commerce Clause. It also challenges long standing assumptions about the state action requirement of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments as well as the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities Clause. Besides being valuable to Supreme Court historians, the subject matter of this volume, which covers both constitutional law and legal history, will be of substantial interest to lawyers, judges, and political scientists, particularly in view of recent developments on the high Court. The lessons taught by this chapter of Supreme Court jurisprudence offer insight into constitutional interpretation in general, and the conclusion develops this idea by looking at the problematic interaction between law and outside historical influences.

Examining a series of court decisions made during the 1980s regarding the legal claims of several Native American tribes who attempted to protect ancestrally revered lands from development schemes by the federal government, this book looks at important questions raised about the religious status of land. The tribes used the First Amendment right of free exercise of religion as the basis of their claim, since governmental action threatened to alter the land which served as the primordial sacred reality without which their derivative religious practices would be meaningless. Brown argues that a constricted notion of religion on the part of the courts, combined with a pervasive cultural predisposition towards land as private property, marred the Constitutional analysis of the courts to deprive the Native American plaintiffs of religious liberty.Brown looks at four cases, which raised the issue at the federal district and appellate court levels, centered on lands in Tennessee, Utah, South Dakota, and Arizona; then it considers a fifth case regarding land in northwestern California, which ultimately went to the U.S. Supreme Court. In all cases, the author identifies serious deficiencies in the judicial evaluations. The lower courts applied a conception of religion as a set of beliefs and practices that are discrete and essentially separate from land, thus distorting and devaluing the fundamental basis of the tribal claims. It was this reductive fixation of land as property, implicit in the rulings of the first four cases, that became explicitly sanctioned and codified in the Supreme Court's decision in Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association of 1988. In reaching such a position, the Supreme Court injudiciously engaged in a policy determination to protect government land holdings, and did so through a shocking repudiation of its own long established jurisprudential procedure in cases concerning the free exercise of religion.

An examination of the language of law in the area of political representation, this book considers the development and recognition of group claims brought pursuant to the Voting Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause in Supreme Court opinions. In his analysis, Burke highlights the different, discursive strategies, broadly identified as liberal and communitarian, used by the Supreme Court to justify the outcomes of various cases, and he argues that no particular strategy of justification is inherently politically conservative or liberal and that no conception of political representation is unassailable. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Supreme Court will articulate a stable measure of fair representation.The Supreme Court offers one more forum in the deliberation over what is fair representation; however, it is not likely to provide minority communities with a legal answer to the problem of political underrepresentation. As such, this book tells the uncertain story of the creation of political fairness by the Supreme Court. The language used to characterize what is fair and representative, and the theoretical designs which the rhetoric reflects, allows us to formulate concepts of fair representation as legal standards evolve. By placing the debate over fair representation in not only political and legal but also philosophical terms, we are better able to understand the inevitable tensions that drive the concept of representation into new, ill-defined, and contentious areas.

“Collins addresses a subject that has been the object of much research and controversy in the past decade: the internment of tens of thousands of Japanese-Americans during WW II. More specifically, he focuses on the mass renunciation of citizenship by these persons of Japanese ancestry. The author contends that the renunciations were based on misinformation rather than on disloyalty... The book is well written, presenting some new data rather than merely relying on existing documents. The bibiliography is comprehensive for those who may have an interest in the general subject of the treatment of Japanese-Americans during the war. Readers in the fields of American and ethnic history, diplomacy, and Asian studies will find this book of use. College, university, and public library collections.”–Choice

Alfredo Garcia, who has been both a prosecuting and a defense attorney in criminal processes, reviews the United States Supreme Court's interpretations of the Sixth Amendment--the right to a fair trial--as they have evolved since the 1960s. He determines that the Court, with a few notable exceptions, has demonstrated doctrinal inconsistency and has failed to adhere to the core values embedded in the amendment. Garcia argues that the functional and symbolic roles of the Sixth Amendment have been eroded, and that this is particularly evident in the three clauses that provide defendants the means to respond to charges and to be assured of fair process. The clauses considered specifically involve the right to counsel, the right to confrontation, and the right to compulsory process. The Supreme Court's emphasis in more recent years is perceived to be on efficiency rather than on protecting the ideal of a fair trial.The six chapters cover the rights to counsel, to confrontation, to compulsory process, to a speedy trial, and to a jury trial, and the sometime conflict between a free press (First Amendment) and the Sixth Amendment assurance of a fair trial free of antecedent prejudicial publicity. This is a timely, much-needed, and substantive examination of the highest court's interpretations of a defendant's constitutional right to a fair, speedy trial.

This study proposes a multilateralist method of choice of law in order to alleviate the great disarray that currently exists in American choice law. In the early 20th century, there was a fairly-uniform multilateralist method of choice law. In the 1920s and 30s, however, scholars adn courts began to reject this method. Viewed as too mechanical the method sometimes resulted in the choice of law of a state with only a tenuous connection to the controversy. Currently, state courts use four different approached to choice law with numerous material variations. This study rejects these approaches on normative, constitutional, and practical grounds. Instead, it advocates that courts adopt a multilateralist approach to choice of law that is forum- and content-neutral and that respects the rights of both individuals and states. The study also argues that such an approach should satisfy a constitutional standard that requires a court not choose one state's law when another state has a significantly closer connection to controversy.The proposed method consists of two parts. The first part determines the states that have created legal relations applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal realtions applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal relation that applies to the controversy, the second part adopts the law of the state that had the closest connection. The study then applies the suggested method to numerous choice of law problems.

While other books deal with the contemporary issue of the right to die, no attempt has been made to demonstrate substantially the historic nature of this question beyond the borders of the United States. Whiting demonstrates that the right to die controversy stretches back more than two thousand years, and he explains how current attitudes and practices in the U.S. have been influenced by the legal and cultural development of the ancient western world. This perspective allows the reader to understand not only the origins of the controversy, but also the different perspectives that each age has contributed to the ongoing debate.Whiting discusses the development of legal rights within both western culture and the United States, then applies these developments to the question of the right to die. In an environment of public debate that features such emotional events as the exploits of Jack Kevorkian, the publication of how to suicide manuals, and the counterattacks of Right to Life groups, the United States is left with very few options.

Gerard W. Gawalt has collected essays that explore the critical period in the development of the legal profession from 1865 to 1900, when law replaced religion as the controlling element in American society and lawyers clearly established themselves as the formulators, advocates, and arbiters of the law. The authors of these essays explore the extent of the legal profession's involvement in the growth of industrial America, focusing on the state of the profession in various geographic regions and on the profession's institutions and plans for education, regulation, reform, and practice in the period after the Civil War. They address the central question of how the nature and structure of the legal profession was molded by the growth of urban-industrial society and argue that the profession not only adapted, but pioneered and adopted many of the aspects of the new industrialism.

This volume is a comprehensive comparative study of the development of systems for naming judges in two nations, over a period of three centuries. It is designed to confront the origins, both normative and political, that affected the evolution of the systems now used in the United States and France. This book places in normative and historical context discussions about how best to recruit judges, and it explores shifts in priorities for judicial offices and their implications.

This is the first booklength survey of the Anglo-American common law contract over its 800-year history, from genesis in 12th-century England to the present form in contemporary America. The volume presents a technically accurate yet readable analysis that focuses on how the form assumed by contract law was tempered by the reasoning of lawyers and judges, and procedural, economic, intellectual and social considerations throughout the period. Of perennial interest to lawyers is the changing nature of law and how a sophisticated legal system allows that change. Teeven suggests that contract law is an ideal focus for studying the evolution of common law because it is a microcosm of the process of the development of common law.Early chapters study how the Plantagenet royal courts rationalized the use of a trespassory action to fill a void in the actions available to plaintiffs for contract enforcement and analyze how the law of proof influenced contract law's evolution. Teeven assesses the influence of law merchant on contract law as reflected in the decisions of Lord Mansfield and the case law of Colonial America, and he surveys the reception of English contract law by the American colonies. Later chapters consider the American form of contract law of the 19th century and discuss the influence on contract law of the burgeoning merchant class. The last two chapters analyze 20th-century modernization of contract law in the context of an urban, industrialized society; reviews public policy, consumerism, and codification; and poses questions about the future direction of contract law. Containing essential source material within the arguments of lawyers for plaintiffs and defendants and the logic of common law judges, A History of the Anglo-American Common Law of Contract is an important resource for legal historians and other researchers, and for practicing lawyers and law students, both English and American.

A concise, well-written examination by a lawyer-historian of the judicial restraint philosophies of President Truman's four appointees to the Supreme Court: Harold Burton, Fred Vinson, Tom Clark, and Sherman Minton. Rudko's analysis of the four men's opinions in criminal procedure, loyalty-security, racial discrimination, and alien rights cases show that Truman was far more successful than most presidents in choosing justices whose view of the judicial role matched his own. ChoiceMuch of the debate surrounding the Supreme Court can be traced to the notion that the Court is primarily a political rather than a judicial institution. When the Court is viewed from an ideological standpoint, it becomes tempting, for example, to equate judicial restraint with conservatism, and activism with a liberal political perspective. In her study of the Truman Court, Rudko demonstrates the fallacy of the political approach. Focusing of the record of President Truman's four liberal appointees, she looks at the judicial philosophy underlying important decisions involving the rights of individuals and shows how judicial issues--especially the balance between restraint and activism--have determined the decision-making process.

This study draws on critical historical analysis and contemporary language theory to illuminate John Marshall's jurisprudence and political philosophy in new ways. It challenges both liberal and conservative views and it defines Marshall's constitutional interpretations, political ideology, and pragmatic interests anew. It shows how his pragmatism and republican revisionism impacted decisions about matters of property, contract, and debt. Legal scholars, political scientists, and historians interested in law and language, 19th-century history, and republicanism will find this study especially interesting.

The Fifth Amendment is typically equated in both popular and legal discourse with the privilege against self-incrimination. This concept, Garcia reminds us, represents an incomplete view of the amendment. Often forgotten are the other two criminal clauses embodied in the text of the amendment: the right to a grand jury indictment for a serious crime and the freedom from double jeopardy for the same offense.Garcia emphasizes the relationship among these criminal protections. Historical developments suggest that these seemingly disparate provisions have common threads: to provide constitutional protection for all trial-related rights. Underlying these constitutional provisions is the need to check the potential abuse of governmental power over the individual. Indeed, this theme permeated the historical backdrop to the Fifth Amendment. Finally, Garcia examples the practical ties of these clauses. The right to a grand jury indictment, the privilege against self-incrimination and the protection against double-jeopardy represent points in the continuum of the criminal justice process. An important resource for scholars and students involved with Amerian constitutional law, criminal justice, and criminology.

The first attempt to address comparative property law in a common integrative framework, this study discusses German, Italian, French, American, and British property law as mere variations based upon a few fundamental themes through which these nations developed legal systems to provide responses to common economic problems and to set legal foundations for working markets. Basic Principles of Property Law was produced to offer a common framework for the discussion of the law of property within countries in transition, thus it has its basis, not on just one legal system, but on the institutional commonalties that make western property law a working market institution. It offers a major challenge to conventional thinking that in property law the differences between common law and civil law are so important that common core research is impossible.Mattei hopes to guide the reader to think comparatively about property by shedding many preconceived formalistic abstractions. The substance of property law, he argues, is much more common throughout the Western legal tradition than legal scholars would have us believe. Through a set format and accessible writing, this book looks at national legal traditions as responses to common economic problems. It sets the foundations for further much needed integrative comparative legal research in the domain of property law.

A Kansas farm boy, who talked his way into law school despite his lack of a high school diploma, Charles E. Whittaker was admitted to the bar before graduation and became the stereotype of a demanding, workaholic attorney. In a thirty-year practice representing Midwest corporations, he became universally admired among Missouri lawyers, and the American Bar Association called him one of the best selections ever made for the Supreme Court. Yet the very characteristics that made Whittaker one of the most acclaimed choices ensured that his service would be catastrophic both for the Court and for him. By the time he left that bench, legal scholars considered his performance on the Court as one of the saddest.Whittaker was apolitical, yet won judicial appointments requiring strong support from politicians of national strength. He was a hard-line law and order judge who was horrified by the death penalty. During the turbulent 1960s, he called for rational discussion of public issues, yet gave inflammatory speeches linking the civil rights movement to Communism. He was the epitome of his era's Main Street conservatism. Most biographies of justices deal with those who had great influence on law and society. From an institutional standpoint, however, this study of a justice who failed sharpens our understanding of how the U.S. Supreme Court differs from other judicial bodies and fills a surprising gap in the Court's history.

While other books deal with the contemporary issue of the right to die, no attempt has been made to demonstrate substantially the historic nature of this question beyond the borders of the United States. Whiting demonstrates that the right to die controversy stretches back more than two thousand years, and he explains how current attitudes and practices in the U.S. have been influenced by the legal and cultural development of the ancient western world. This perspective allows the reader to understand not only the origins of the controversy, but also the different perspectives that each age has contributed to the ongoing debate.Whiting discusses the development of legal rights within both western culture and the United States, then applies these developments to the question of the right to die. In an environment of public debate that features such emotional events as the exploits of Jack Kevorkian, the publication of how to suicide manuals, and the counterattacks of Right to Life groups, the United States is left with very few options.

Waltenburg and Swinford provide a detailed and systematic examination of state government activity before the U.S. Supreme Court. They provide an explanatory model of state litigation behavior that both rests upon a solid theoretical perspective and places state decisions in a larger political context.After an examination of the evolution of U.S. constitutional law on issues of direct state concern, Waltenburg and Swinford focus most of their attention on qualitative and quanitative analyses of the behavior over time of states in all their roles before the Court. Scholars and other researchers interested in judicial decision-making, Constitutional Law, and inter-governmental relations will find this a particularly useful study.

The new Judicial Federalism is a significant development in American law: more cases are being decided by state constitutions than ever before in history. In this book, Barry Latzer provides the most thorough treatment available of the criminal law aspects of the New Federalism. His comprehensively researched and documented analysis of the state law movement covers all fifty states over the past two decades.Drawing from both legal and political science perspectives, Latzer examines recent court interpretations of state constitutions, specifically those pertaining to the criminally accused. He provides background on the development of the New Federalism, details the relationship between the U.S. Supreme Court and state courts, and analyzes all of the state constitutional provisions on the issues covered in the book. This is an important resource for professionals and students of criminal justice and law, and anyone concerned with the political-ideological tension between federal and state courts.