In this authoritative reckoning with the eighteen-year record of the Rehnquist Court, Georgetown law professor Mark Tushnet reveals how the decisions of nine deeply divided justices have left the future of the Court; and the nation; hanging in the balance. Many have assumed that the chasm on the Court has been between its liberals and its conservatives. In reality, the division was between those in tune with the modern post-Reagan Republican Party and those who, though considered to be in the Court's center, represent an older Republican tradition. As a result, the Court has modestly promoted the agenda of today's economic conservatives, but has regularly defeated the agenda of social issues conservatives; while paving the way for more radically conservative path in the future.
A major legal scholar presents an empowering reassessment of our nation’s most essential document In this surprising and highly unconventional work, Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet poses a seemingly simple question that yields a thoroughly unexpected answer. The Constitution matters, he argues, not because it structures our government but because it structures our politics. He maintains that politicians and political parties—not Supreme Court decisions—are the true engines of constitutional change in our system. This message will empower all citizens who use direct political action to define and protect our rights and liberties as Americans. Unlike legal scholars who consider the Constitution only as a blueprint for American democracy, Tushnet focuses on the ways it serves as a framework for political debate. Each branch of government draws substantive inspiration and procedural structure from the Constitution but can effect change only when there is the political will to carry it out. Tushnet’s political understanding of the Constitution therefore does not demand that citizens pore over the specifics of each Supreme Court decision in order to improve our nation. Instead, by providing key facts about Congress, the president, and the nature of the current constitutional regime, his book reveals not only why the Constitution matters to each of us but also, and perhaps more important, how it matters.
Most recent discussion of the United States Constitution and war—both the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq—has been dominated by two diametrically opposed views: the alarmism of those who see many current policies as portending gross restrictions on American civil liberties, and the complacency of those who see these same policies as entirely reasonable accommodations to the new realities of national security. Whatever their contributions to the public discussion and policy-making processes, these voices contribute little to an understanding of the real constitutional issues raised by war. Providing the historical and legal context needed to assess competing claims, The Constitution in Wartime identifies and explains the complexities of the important constitutional issues brought to the fore by wartime actions and policies. Twelve prominent legal scholars and political scientists combine broad overviews of U.S. history and contemporary policy with detailed yet accessible analyses of legal issues of pressing concern today. Some of the essays are broad in scope, reflecting on national character, patriotism, and political theory; exploring whether war and republican government are compatible; and considering in what sense we can be said to be in wartime circumstances today. Others are more specific, examining the roles of Congress, the presidency, the courts, and the international legal community. Throughout the collection, balanced, unbiased analysis leads to some surprising conclusions, one of which is that wartime conditions have sometimes increased, rather than curtailed, civil rights and civil liberties. For instance, during the cold war, government officials regarded measures aimed at expanding African Americans’ freedom at home as crucial to improving America’s image abroad. Contributors. Sotirios Barber, Mark Brandon, James E. Fleming, Mark Graber, Samuel Issacharoff, David Luban, Richard H. Pildes, Eric Posner, Peter Spiro, William Michael Treanor, Mark Tushnet, Adrian Vermeule
Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights, Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law. Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.
Examines the initial years of the Roberts Court, covering the legal philosophies that have informed decisions on such major cases as the Affordable Care Act, the political structures behind appointments, and the struggle for dominance of the Court.
In his 1996 State of the Union Address, President Bill Clinton announced that the "age of big government is over." Some Republicans accused him of cynically appropriating their themes, while many Democrats thought he was betraying the principles of the New Deal and the Great Society. Mark Tushnet argues that Clinton was stating an observed fact: the emergence of a new constitutional order in which the aspiration to achieve justice directly through law has been substantially chastened. Tushnet argues that the constitutional arrangements that prevailed in the United States from the 1930s to the 1990s have ended. We are now in a new constitutional order--one characterized by divided government, ideologically organized parties, and subdued constitutional ambition. Contrary to arguments that describe a threatened return to a pre-New Deal constitutional order, however, this book presents evidence that our current regime's animating principle is not the old belief that government cannot solve any problems but rather that government cannot solve any more problems. Tushnet examines the institutional arrangements that support the new constitutional order as well as Supreme Court decisions that reflect it. He also considers recent developments in constitutional scholarship, focusing on the idea of minimalism as appropriate to a regime with chastened ambitions. Tushnet discusses what we know so far about the impact of globalization on domestic constitutional law, particularly in the areas of international human rights and federalism. He concludes with predictions about the type of regulation we can expect from the new order. This is a major new analysis of the constitutional arrangements in the United States. Though it will not be received without controversy, it offers real explanatory and predictive power and provides important insights to both legal theorists and political scientists.
This is the second edition of Professor Tushnet's short critical introduction to the history and current meaning of the United States' Constitution. It is organised around wo themes: first, the US Constitution is old, short, and difficult to amend. Second, the Constitution creates a structure of political opportunities that allows political actors, icluding political parties, to pursue the preferred policy goals even to the point of altering the very structure of politics. Deploying these themes to examine the structure f the national government, federalism, judicial review, and individual rights, the book provides basic information about, and deeper insights into, the way he US constitutional system has developed and what it means today.
The first paperback edition of a classic of American constitutional theory. The book is divided into two parts. In Part I Professor Tushnet appraises the five major competing “grand theories” of constitutional law and interpretation, and, argues that none of them satisfy their own requirements for coherence and judicial constraint. In Part II the author offers a descriptive sociology of constitutional doctrine and raises critical questions as to whether a grand theory is necessary, is it possible to construct a coherent, useful grand theory, and is construction of an uncontroversial grand theory possible? Professor Tushnet’s new Afterword is organized in parallel fashion to the original text. Part I offers a new survey of the contemporary terrain of constitutional interpretation. Part II provides an extended discussion of the most prominent of contemporary efforts to provide an external analysis of constitutional law, the idea of regime politics. This includes discussion of major court decisions, including Bush v. Gore and Citizens United.
In this surprising and highly unconventional work, Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet poses a seemingly simple question that yields a thoroughly unexpected answer. The Constitution matters, he argues, not because it structures our government but because it structures our politics. He maintains that politicians and political parties—not Supreme Court decisions—are the true engines of constitutional change in our system. This message will empower all citizens who use direct political action to define and protect our rights and liberties as Americans. Unlike legal scholars who consider the Constitution only as a blueprint for American democracy, Tushnet focuses on the ways it serves as a framework for political debate. Each branch of government draws substantive inspiration and procedural structure from the Constitution but can effect change only when there is the political will to carry it out. Tushnet’s political understanding of the Constitution therefore does not demand that citizens pore over the specifics of each Supreme Court decision in order to improve our nation. Instead, by providing key facts about Congress, the president, and the nature of the current constitutional regime, his book reveals not only why the Constitution matters to each of us but also, and perhaps more important, how it matters.
How the Supreme Court's move to the right has distorted both logic and the Constitution What Supreme Court justices do is far more than just "calling balls and strikes." The Court has never simply evaluated laws and arguments in light of permanent and immutable constitutional meanings. Social, moral, and yes, political ideas have always played into the justices' impressions of how they think a case should be decided. Mark Tushnet traces the ways constitutional thought has evolved, from the liberalism of the New Deal and the Great Society to the Reagan conservatism that has been dominant since the 1980s. Looking at the current crossroads in the constitutional order, Tushnet explores the possibilities of either a Trumpian entrenchment of the most extreme ideas of the Reagan philosophy, or a dramatic and destabilizing move to the left. Wary of either outcome, he offers a passionate and informed argument for replacing judicial supremacy with popular constitutionalism--a move that would restore to the other branches of government a role in deciding constitutional questions.
Chronological narrative history of the legal struggle which preceded the political battles for civil rights in the thirties, forties and fifties, waged by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund led by Thurgood Marshall
The Advanced Introduction to Freedom of Expression provides an overview of major issues in the doctrinal structure of a law of freedom of expression, relevant to discussions of freedom of expression under many national constitutions. Assuming familiarity with basic theories of free expression, this book addresses the implications of reasonable disagreement between legislatures and courts about whether a specific measure violates freedom of expression, the implications of the fundamental proposition that speech can cause harm, the distinction between the coverage of freedom of expression and the protections it affords, and the appropriate doctrinal forms when speech is said to conflict with other rights such as equality, or merely other social interests. The book will be of interest to anyone, including students, teachers, researchers and policymakers wanting to learn more about the freedom of expression and the law.
Approaching the concept of Islamic constitutionalism from a comparative perspective, this thought-provoking study by Antoni Abat i Ninet and Mark Tushnet uses traditional Western political theory as a lens to develop a framework for analyzing the events known as the ‘Arab Spring’. Writing with clarity and insight, the authors place Western and Arabic traditions into a constructive dialogue. They focus on whether we can develop a ‘theory of revolutions’ that helps us understand events occurring at divergent times at geographically separate locations. This question is meticulously analyzed through the detailed examination of specific developments relevant to the ideas of revolution and constitutionalism in several nations affected by the Arab Spring. Case studies focus on Morocco and Libya as examples of unsuccessful revolutions, as well as Tunisia and Egypt. These lead the authors to consider the nature of constitutionalism itself and the concept of illiberal but non-authoritarian constitutions: a particularly pressing concern given the prominent contemporary discussions of the role of shari’a in post-Arab Spring constitutions. The Arab Spring will offer new insights to scholars, researchers and students of law and the political sciences, in particular those focusing on theories of revolution, democracy, constitutional law, Islamic constitutionalism and legal theory.
Mark Tushnet excels in updating the Advanced Introduction to Comparative Constitutional Law. In this second edition Tushnet includes new material based on developments in practice and scholarship since the original edition’s publication back in 2014. Topics which are given substantial additional attention include abusive constitutionalism, the idea of the constituent power, eternity clauses and unconstitutional amendments, recent developments in weak- and strong-form constitutional review, and expanded consideration of third generation rights. This title will appeal to those who fell in love with the first edition and those who are interested in learning more about Comparative Constitutional Law.
The Hughes Court: From Progressivism to Pluralism, 1930 to 1941 describes the closing of one era in constitutional jurisprudence and the opening of another. This comprehensive study of the Supreme Court from 1930 to 1941 – when Charles Evans Hughes was Chief Justice – shows how nearly all justices, even the most conservative, accepted the broad premises of a Progressive theory of government and the Constitution. The Progressive view gradually increased its hold throughout the decade, but at its end, interest group pluralism began to influence the law. By 1941, constitutional and public law was discernibly different from what it had been in 1930, but there was no sharp or instantaneous Constitutional Revolution in 1937 despite claims to the contrary. This study supports its conclusions by examining the Court's work in constitutional law, administrative law, the law of justiciability, civil rights and civil liberties, and statutory interpretation.
Constitutional Law, Ninth Edition by Geoffrey R. Stone, Louis M. Seidman, Cass R. Sunstein, Mark V. Tushnet, Pamela S. Karlan, Aziz Z. Huq, and Leah M. Litman guides students through all facets of constitutional law, exploring traditional constitutional doctrine through the lens of varying critical and social perspectives informed by political theory, philosophy, sociology, ethics, history, and economics. The purchase of this ebook edition does not entitle you to receive access to the Connected eBook with Study Center on CasebookConnect. You will need to purchase a new print book to get access to the full experience, including: lifetime access to the online ebook with highlight, annotation, and search capabilities; practice questions from your favorite study aids; an outline tool and other helpful resources. Constitutional Law, Ninth Editiontakes a comprehensive approach to the way in which constitutional law arises. It offers instructors carefully edited cases and rich, interdisciplinary material for classroom discussion. Logically organized for a two-semester course, the first part of Constitutional Law tackles issues concerning separation of powers and federalism; the second part addresses all facets of individual rights and liberties. Constitutional Law, Ninth Edition, also provides thoughtfully selected content on the First Amendment, to give students a well-rounded understanding of religion and free speech issues. New to the Ninth Edition: Extensively revised treatment of the Religion Clauses. Revamped material on abortion rights given Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. More focused and tightened presentation of judicial review, federalism, and other areas. Professors and students will benefit from: The text’s attention to policy, including discussion of competing critical and social perspectives. An interdisciplinary approach that draws on political theory, philosophy, sociology, ethics, history, and economics. Thoughtful editing, including both lightly and more tightly edited cases, that balances close textual analysis with comprehensive converge of important opinions and pivotal cases. Streamlined treatment of First Amendment law, so that it efficiently provides the necessary fundamentals in free speech and religious liberties jurisprudence. A comprehensive coverage that is ideal for a two-semester course.
Mark Tushnet presents the story of the NAACP's legal campaign against segregated schools as a case study in public interest law, which in fact began in the United States with that very campaign.
Few constitutional disputes maintain as powerful a grip on the public mind as the battle over the Second Amendment. The National Rifle Association and gun-control groups struggle unceasingly over a piece of the political landscape that no candidate for the presidency--and few for Congress--can afford to ignore. But who's right? Will it ever be possible to settle the argument? In Out of Range, one of the nation's leading legal scholars takes a calm, objective look at this bitter debate. Mark V. Tushnet brings to this book a deep expertise in the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and the role of the law in American life. He breaks down the different positions on the Second Amendment, showing that it is a mistake to stereotype them. Tushnet's exploration is honest and nuanced; he finds the constitutional arguments finely balanced, which is one reason the debate has raged for so long. Along the way, he examines various experiments in public policy, from both sides, and finds little clear evidence for the practical effectiveness of any approach to gun safety and prosecution. Of course, he notes, most advocates of the right to keep and bear arms agree that it should be subject to reasonable regulation. Ultimately, Tushnet argues, our view of the Second Amendment reflects our sense of ourselves as a people. The answer to the debate will not be found in any holy writ, but in our values and our vision of the nation. This compact, incisive examination offers an honest and thoughtful guide to both sides of the argument, pointing the way to solutions that could calm, if not settle, this bitter dispute.
In an examination of Southern slave law between 1810 and 1860, Mark Tushnet reveals a structured dichotomy between slave labor systems and bourgeois systems of production. Whereas the former rest on the total dominion of the master over the slave and necessitate a concern for the slave's humanity, the latter rest of the purchase by the capitalist of a worker's labor power only and are concerned primarily with economic interest. Focusing on a wide range of issues that include contract and accident law as well as criminal law and the law of manumission, he shows how Southern slave law had to respond to the competing pressures of humanity and interest. Beginning with a critical evaluation of slave law, the author develops the conceptual framework for his own perspective on the legal system, drawing on the works of Marx and Weber. He then examines four appellate court cases decided in three different states, from civil-law Louisiana to commonlaw North Carolina, at widely separated times, from 1818 to 1858. Professor Tushnet finds that the cases display a continuing but never wholly successful attempt at distinguish between law and sentiment as modes of regulating social interactions involving slaves. Also, the cases show that the primary method of accommodating law and sentiment was an attempt to use rigid categories to confine the law of slavery to what was thought its proper sphere. Mark Tushnet is Professor of Law at the University of Wisconsin. Originally published in 1981. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.
Following on Making Civil Rights Law, which covered Thurgood Marshall's career from 1936-1961, this book focuses on Marshall's career on the Supreme Court from 1961-1991, where he was first Afro-American Justice. The first book on Justice Thurgood Marshall's years on the Supreme Court based on a comprehensive review of the Supreme Court papers of Justices Marshall and William J. Brennan, this work describes Marshall's special approach to constitutional law in areas ranging from civil rights and the death penalty to abortion and poverty. It also describes the Supreme Court's operations during Marshall's tenure, the relations among the justices, and the particular roles played by Chief Justice Warren Burger, Justice Brennan, and Justice Antonin Scalia. The book locates the Supreme Court's actions from 1967 to 1991 in a broader historical and political context, explaining how Marshall's liberalism became increasingly isolated on a Court influenced by nation's drift in a more conservative direction.
The 2021 Annual Supplement, like prior Supplements, includes excerpts from recent scholarship and from important new decisions of the Supreme Court. With the departure of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, this was an especially interesting Term, and several of the new decisions that are covered in the Annual Supplement are listed below. New to the 2021 Supplement: Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski – standing California v. Texas – ACA challenge on federalism grounds Collins v. Mnuchin – Separation of Powers challenge to FHFA Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid – Takings Clause Mahanoy Area School District v. B.H. – off-site school speech Americans for Prosperity v. Rodriguez – campaign disclosures Tandon v. Newsom – religious liberty Fulton v. City of Philadelphia – religious liberty
Buy a new version of this textbook and receive access to the Connected eBook with Study Center on CasebookConnect, including: lifetime access to the online ebook with highlight, annotation, and search capabilities; practice questions from your favorite study aids; an outline tool and other helpful resources. Connected eBooks provide what you need most to be successful in your law school classes. Learn more about Connected eBooks Adhering to the multi-disciplinary and scholarly approach of its predecessors, the eighth edition of Constitutional Law guides students through all facets of constitutional law. Constitutional Law explores traditional constitutional doctrine through the lens of varying critical and social perspectives informed by political theory, philosophy, sociology, ethics, history, and economics. This comprehensive approach paired with carefully edited cases provides instructors with rich material for classroom discussion. Logically organized for a two-semester course, the first part of Constitutional Law tackles issues concerning separation of powers and federalism while the second part addresses all facets of individual rights and liberties. Constitutional Law also provides thoughtfully selected content on the First Amendment to give students a well-rounded understanding of religion and free speech issues. Key Features: The text’s attention to policy, including discussion of competing critical and social perspectives. A multi-disciplinary approach that draws on political theory, philosophy, sociology, ethics, history, and economics. Thoughtful editing, including both lightly and more tightly-edited cases that balances close textual analysis with comprehensive converge of important opinions and pivotal cases. Streamlined treatment of First Amendment law, so that it efficiently provides the necessary fundamentals in free speech and religious liberties jurisprudence.
Emanuel® Law Outlines for Constitutional Law, Forty-First Edition, by Steve Emanuel focuses on those topics that are important in today’s Constitutional Law courses and includes an abundance of short-answer questions and answers as well as exam tips. New to the Forty-First Edition: Coverage of key 2022-2023 Supreme Court developments, including: Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, holding that universities may no longer take race into account in making admissions decisions and thus nullifying traditional affirmative action in admissions. Biden v. Nebraska, a separation-of-powers decision holding that the Biden administration’s cancellation of up to $400 billion of student loan debt was invalid under the “major question” doctrine. Under that doctrine, a federal agency may act on a major question of economic or political significance only if there is “clear direction” from Congress allowing that action. Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. Ross, a decision reaffirming that even where a state law was not enacted with an intent to discriminate against interstate commerce, the Court will still perform a rough balancing test, under which it will find a dormant Commerce Clause violation if the burden imposed on commerce is clearly excessive compared with the local benefits. Counterman v. Colorado, a free-speech case reaffirming that threats of violence are not protected by the First Amendment but holding that to treat the making of such a threat as a crime, the prosecution must prove that the speaker acted “recklessly,” i.e., that the speaker “consciously disregarded” a substantial risk that the speech would cause harm to another. Moore v. Harper, a decision about the meaning of the “Elections Clause,” which gives each state legislature the power to determine the “times, places and manner” of congressional elections. The Court rejected the “independent state legislature” theory, which contended that a state legislature’s power to regulate federal elections was absolute. The Capsule Summary provides a quick reference summary of the key concepts covered in the full Outline. The detailed course Outline with black letter principles supplements your casebook reading throughout the semester and gives structure to your own outline. The Quiz Yourself feature includes a series of short-answer questions and sample answers to help you test your knowledge of the chapter’s content. Exam Tips alert you to issues and commonly used fact patterns found on exams. The Casebook Correlation Chart correlates each section in the Outline with the pages covering that topic in the major casebooks.
This book is the 2024 case supplement to Constitutional Law, Ninth Edition by Geoffrey R. Stone, Louis M. Seidman, Cass R. Sunstein, Mark V. Tushnet, Pamela S. Karlan, Aziz Z. Huq, and Leah M. Litman. The 2024 Annual Supplement, like prior Supplements, includes excerpts from recent scholarship and from important new decisions of the Supreme Court—including major cases on the distribution of national powers and equality. This term reflects the continued shift in the orientation of the Court after the appointment by President Trump of three new Justices. New to the 2024 Supplement: Trump v. United States Trump v. Anderson Murthy v. Missouri Moody v. Netchoice and Netchoice v. Paxton FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine Professors and students will benefit from: Judicious excerpts of recent opinions
A look at First Amendment coverage of music, non-representational art, and nonsense The Supreme Court has unanimously held that Jackson Pollock’s paintings, Arnold Schöenberg’s music, and Lewis Carroll’s poem “Jabberwocky” are “unquestionably shielded” by the First Amendment. Nonrepresentational art, instrumental music, and nonsense: all receive constitutional coverage under an amendment protecting “the freedom of speech,” even though none involves what we typically think of as speech—the use of words to convey meaning. As a legal matter, the Court’s conclusion is clearly correct, but its premises are murky, and they raise difficult questions about the possibilities and limitations of law and expression. Nonrepresentational art, instrumental music, and nonsense do not employ language in any traditional sense, and sometimes do not even involve the transmission of articulable ideas. How, then, can they be treated as “speech” for constitutional purposes? What does the difficulty of that question suggest for First Amendment law and theory? And can law resolve such inquiries without relying on aesthetics, ethics, and philosophy? Comprehensive and compelling, this book represents a sustained effort to account, constitutionally, for these modes of “speech.” While it is firmly centered in debates about First Amendment issues, it addresses them in a novel way, using subject matter that is uniquely well suited to the task, and whose constitutional salience has been under-explored. Drawing on existing legal doctrine, aesthetics, and analytical philosophy, three celebrated law scholars show us how and why speech beyond words should be fundamental to our understanding of the First Amendment.
Marbury v. Madison, decided in 1803, is the foundation stone of the American doctrine of judicial review. Remarkably, the case was decided without the parties having presented an oral argument to the Supreme Court. This book begins with a unique transcript of an oral argument in the case, conducted before a bench of four distinguished federal judges. The transcript is followed by essays on Marburys intellectual background, its significance in U.S. constitutional history, and the way in which we might think of constitutional theory and judicial review in terms sensitive to the historical and political contexts in which the practice persists. Distinguished commentators question some of the claims made in the essays, and offer their own perspectives on Marburys importance.
This is an important and useful legal primer for Central America activists. It shatters the myths about the "neutrality" of U.S. law and situates legal questions where they really are: in the arena of political struggle. It shows how the law is used both by governing elites who share a consensus on keeping U.S. hegemony in Central America and by grassroots movements that push the limits of law and appeal to its underlying values to work for the self-determination of peoples in the region.
Mark A. Graber explores the fundamental elements of the American constitutional order with particular emphasis on how constitutionalism in the United States is a form of politics and not a means of subordinating politics to law.
Power to the People proposes that some forms of populism are inconsistent with constitutionalism, while others aren't. By providing a series of case studies, some organized by nation, others by topic, the book identifies these populist inconsistencies with constitutionalism-and, importantly, when and how they are not. Opening a dialogue for the possibility of a deeper, populist democracy, the book examines recent challenges to the idea that democracy is agood form of government by exploring possibilities for new institutions that can determine and implement a majority's views without always threatening constitutionalism.
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.