Today's United States Supreme Court consists of nine intriguingly varied justices and one overwhelming contradiction: Compared to its revolutionary predecessor, the Rehnquist Court appears deceptively passive, yet it stands as dramatically ready to defy convention as the Warren Court of the 1950s and 60s. Now Kenneth W. Starr-who served as clerk for one chief justice, argued twenty-five cases as solicitor general before the Supreme Court, and is widely regarded as one of the nation's most distinguished practitioners of constitutional law-offers us an incisive and unprecedented look at the paradoxes, the power, and the people of the highest court in the land. In FIRST AMONG EQUALS Ken Starr traces the evolution of the Supreme Court from its beginnings, examines major Court decisions of the past three decades, and uncovers the sometimes surprising continuity between the precedent-shattering Warren Court and its successors under Burger and Rehnquist. He shows us, as no other author ever has, the very human justices who shape our law, from Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court's most pivotal-and perhaps most powerful-player, to Clarence Thomas, its most original thinker. And he explores the present Court's evolution into a lawyerly tribunal dedicated to balance and consensus on the one hand, and zealous debate on hotly contested issues of social policy on the other. * On race, the Court overturned affirmative action and held firm to an undeviating color-blind standard. * On executive privilege, the Court rebuffed three presidents, both Republican and Democrat, who fought to increase their power at the expense of rival branches of government. * On the 2000 presidential election, the Court prevented what it deemed a runaway Florida court from riding roughshod over state law-illustrating how in our system of government, the Supreme Court is truly the first among equals. Compelling and supremely readable, FIRST AMONG EQUALS sheds new light on the most frequently misunderstood legal pillar of American life.
Despite of my limited legal background, there is always an impulsive thrust urging me to understand the legal framework and how it fits in the society. One of the interesting topic I came across while staying in Beijing is the Supreme Court and its basic ro...
评分Despite of my limited legal background, there is always an impulsive thrust urging me to understand the legal framework and how it fits in the society. One of the interesting topic I came across while staying in Beijing is the Supreme Court and its basic ro...
评分Despite of my limited legal background, there is always an impulsive thrust urging me to understand the legal framework and how it fits in the society. One of the interesting topic I came across while staying in Beijing is the Supreme Court and its basic ro...
评分Despite of my limited legal background, there is always an impulsive thrust urging me to understand the legal framework and how it fits in the society. One of the interesting topic I came across while staying in Beijing is the Supreme Court and its basic ro...
评分Despite of my limited legal background, there is always an impulsive thrust urging me to understand the legal framework and how it fits in the society. One of the interesting topic I came across while staying in Beijing is the Supreme Court and its basic ro...
本书回答了一个关于美国最高法院和Judicial Branch的问题:Judicial 是否比 Executive 和 Legislative Branch对重大社会事件更有影响力和决策力,尤其是针对宪法的解读。答案是肯定的。详见书评。
评分本书回答了一个关于美国最高法院和Judicial Branch的问题:Judicial 是否比 Executive 和 Legislative Branch对重大社会事件更有影响力和决策力,尤其是针对宪法的解读。答案是肯定的。详见书评。
评分本书回答了一个关于美国最高法院和Judicial Branch的问题:Judicial 是否比 Executive 和 Legislative Branch对重大社会事件更有影响力和决策力,尤其是针对宪法的解读。答案是肯定的。详见书评。
评分本书回答了一个关于美国最高法院和Judicial Branch的问题:Judicial 是否比 Executive 和 Legislative Branch对重大社会事件更有影响力和决策力,尤其是针对宪法的解读。答案是肯定的。详见书评。
评分本书回答了一个关于美国最高法院和Judicial Branch的问题:Judicial 是否比 Executive 和 Legislative Branch对重大社会事件更有影响力和决策力,尤其是针对宪法的解读。答案是肯定的。详见书评。
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有