Americans have become blinded by fear and our government seems incapable of a vision beyond 90 days. Can't you see? We have failed to counter the rise of powerful foreign economies. Lacking concern for America's future and middle class, the wealthy have piled up excessive personal wealth, causing a shrinking middle class. Lawmakers overregulated our country with uniformity that stole America's unique spirit of adventure, individual freedom and personal responsibility. In politics, polarization is king. Professional demagogues succeeded in stirring up more hate for the opposite side of the political aisle than for America's real enemies. Compromise used to be smart business; now it is considered a weakness or act of betrayal. Stubborn ideology, once an impractical trait is now a virtue of strong character. Many countries (and fascist groups) use our weaknesses to their advantage. We've got it all wrong. Americans need to work together if we hope to induce positive change both here and abroad. Most Americans sense signs of decay but can't put the finger on the causes, let alone solutions. It is not easy to see the forest for the trees. This book makes that job easier.
In Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, a critical abortion rights case, a bitterly divided Supreme Court produced no less than six different opinions. Writing for the plurality, Chief Justice Rehnquist attacked the trimester framework established in Roe v. Wade because it was "not found in the text of the Constitution or in any place else one would expect to find a constitutional principle." This approach, writes legal authority Joseph Goldstein, confuses constitutional principles (in this case, the right to privacy) with the means to protect them (here, the trimester system). As a result, the Court left the public bewildered about the constitutional scope of a woman's right to reproductive choice--failing in its duty to speak clearly to the American public about the Constitution. In The Intelligible Constitution, Goldstein makes a compelling argument that, in a democracy based upon informed consent, the Supreme Court has an obligation to communicate clearly and candidly to We the People when it interprets the Constitution. After a fascinating discussion of the language of the Constitution and Supreme Court opinions (including the analysis of Webster), he presents a series of opinion studies in important cases, focusing not on ideology but on the Justices' clarity of thought and expression. Using the two Brown v. Board of Education cases, Cooper v. Aaron, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, and others as his examples, Goldstein demonstrates the pitfalls to which the Court has succumbed in the past: Writing deliberately ambiguous decisions to win the votes of colleagues, challenging each others' opinions in private but not in public, and not speaking honestly when the writer knows a concurring Justice misunderstands the opinion which he or she is supporting. Even some landmark decisions, he writes, have featured seriously flawed opinions--preventing We the People from understanding why the Justices reasoned as they did, and why they disagreed with each other. He goes on to suggest five "canons of comprehensibility" for Supreme Court opinions, to ensure that the Justices explain themselves clearly, honestly, and unambiguously, so that all the various opinions in each case would constitute a comprehensible message about their accord and discord in interpreting the Constitution. Both a fascinating look at how the Court shapes its opinions and a clarion call to action, this book provides an important addition to our understanding of how to maintain the Constitution as a living document, by and for the People, in its third century.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
How Books, Reading and Subscription Libraries Defined Colonial Clubland in the British Empire argues that within an entangled web of imperial, colonial and book trade networks books, reading and subscription libraries contributed to a core and peripheral criteria of clubbability used by the "select people"—clubbable settler elite—to vet the "proper sort"—clubbable indigenous elite—as they culturally, economically and socially navigated their way towards membership in colonial clubland. As a microcosm for British-controlled areas of the Caribbean, Asia and Africa, this book assesses the history, membership, growth and collection development of three colonial subscription libraries—the Penang Library in Malaysia, the General Library of the Institute of Jamaica and the Lagos Library in Nigeria—during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This work also examines the places these libraries occupied within the lives of their subscribers, and how the British Council reorganized these colonial subscription libraries to ensure their survival and the survival of colonial clubland in a post-colonial world. This book is designed to accommodate historians of Britain and its empire who are unfamiliar with library history, library historians who are unfamiliar with British history, and book historians who are unfamiliar with both topics.
The second volume in a classic trilogy of reference works often cited in child custody cases, which introduced the concept of the “least detrimental alternative” when addressing a child’s welfare. The second volume in a classic trilogy of works by Joseph Goldstein, former Sterling Professor Emeritus of Law at Yale Law School; Albert J. Solnit, the former director of the Yale Child Study Center, and Anna Freud, daughter of Sigmund Freud. These texts (Beyond the Best Interests of the Child was the first in the series, and In the Best Interests of the Child was the third) are classic references often cited in child custody cases; Before the Best Interests of the Child specifically addresses when the state should intervene. Rather than the familiar legal "best interests of the child" doctrine, the authors’s work is based on the more realistic standard of finding the "least detrimental alternative." This is indispensable reading for social workers, family court judges, lawyers, psychologists, and parents.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.