The American State Constitutional Tradition by John J. Dinan
Lawrence : University Press of Kansas, c2006
KF4541 .D56 2006 Balcony

In The American State Constitutional Tradition, John Dinan shows that state constitutions are much more than mere echoes of the federal document. The first comprehensive study of all 114 state constitutional conventions for which there are recorded debates, his book shows that state constitutional debates in many ways better reflect the accumulated wisdom of American constitution-makers than do the more traditional studies of the federal constitution.

Wielding extraordinary command over a mass of historical detail, Dinan clarifies the alternatives considered by state constitution makers and the reasons for the adoption or rejection of various governing principles and institutions. Among other things, he shows that the states are nearly universal in their rejection of the rigid federal model of the constitutional amendment process, favoring more flexible procedures for constitutional change; they often grant citizens greater direct participation in law-making; they have debated and at times rejected the value of bicameralism; and they have altered the veto powers of both the executive and judicial branches.

Dinan also shows that, while the Founders favored a minimalist design and focused exclusively on protecting individuals from government action, state constitution makers have often adopted more detailed constitutions, sometimes specifying positive rights that depend on government action for their enforcement. Moreover, unlike the federal constitution, state constitutions often contain provisions dedicated to the formation of citizen character, ranging from compulsory schooling to the regulation of gambling or liquor.

By integrating state constitution making with the federal constitutional tradition, this path-breaking work widens and deepens our understanding of the principles by which we've chosen to govern ourselves.

Named for Stella Liebeck--the woman who spilled hot McDonald's coffee on herself and then won a lawsuit against the fast-food chain--humorist Randy Cassingham's popular Web site chronicles the hard-to-believe and amusing claims that have been brought before U.S. courts.

Now, for the first time in book form, The True Stella Awards presents some of the most outlandish and unbelievable-but-true lawsuits in America. Some of the Stella Award cases include:

-The man who legally changed his name to Jack Ass, and then sued MTV for $50 million because their TV show and movie Jackass infringed on his trademark and demeaned his "good name"

-The songwriter who left a minute's silence on his record only to be sued by the estate of another songwriter who copyrighted his own "silent" song

-The man who sued an amusement park after being the victim of the ultimate "Act of God": he was hit by lightning while standing next to his own car in the parking lot.

In 1856 William Dove, a young tenant farmer, was tried and executed for the poisoning of his wife Harriet. The trial might have been a straightforward case of homicide, but because Dove became involved with Henry Harrison, a Leeds wizard, and demonstrated through his actions and words a strong belief in magic and the powers of the devil, considerable effort was made to establish whether these beliefs were symptomatic of insanity. It seems that Dove murdered his wife to hasten a prediction made by Harrison that he would remarry a more attractive and wealthy woman. Dove employed Harrison to perform various acts of magic, and also made his own written pact with the devil to improve his personal circumstances.

The book will study Dove's beliefs and Harrison's activities within the rural and urban communities in which they lived, and examine how modern cultures attempted to explain this largely hidden mental world, which was so sensationally exposed. The Victorian period is often portrayed as an age of great social and educational progress. This book shows how beliefs dismissed by some Victorians as 'medieval superstitions' continued to influence the thoughts and actions of many people, viz most famously Conan `table tapper' Doyle.

The Politics of Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court offers an insightful and provocative analysis of the Supreme Court's most important task--shaping the law. Thomas Hansford and James Spriggs analyze a key aspect of legal change: the Court's interpretation or treatment of the precedents it has set in the past. Court decisions do not just resolve immediate disputes; they also set broader precedent. The meaning and scope of a precedent, however, can change significantly as the Court revisits it in future cases. The authors contend that these interpretations are driven by an interaction between policy goals and variations in the legal authoritativeness of precedent. From this premise, they build an explanation of the legal interpretation of precedent that yields novel predictions about the nature and timing of legal change.

Hansford and Spriggs test their hypotheses by examining how the Court has interpreted the precedents it set between 1946 and 1999. This analysis provides compelling support for their argument, and demonstrates that the justices' ideological goals and the role of precedent are inextricably linked. The two prevailing, yet contradictory, views of precedent--that it acts either solely as a constraint, or as a "cloak" that never actually influences the Court--are incorrect. This book shows that while precedent can operate as a constraint on the justices' decisions, it also represents an opportunity to foster preferred societal outcomes.

This book is the first comprehensive, reasoned, and sympathetic analysis of how Scalia has decided cases during his entire twenty-year Supreme Court tenure. Ralph Rossum focuses on Scalia's more than 600 Supreme Court opinions and dissents--carefully wrought, passionately argued, and filled with well-turned phrases--which portray him as an eloquent defender of an "original meaning" jurisprudence. He also includes analyses of Scalia's Court of Appeals opinions for the D.C. circuit, his major law review articles as a law professor and judge, and his provocative book, A Matter of Interpretation.

Rossum reveals Scalia's understanding of key issues confronting today's Court, such as the separation of powers, federalism, the free speech and press and religion clauses of the First Amendment, and the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. He suggests that Scalia displays such a keen interest in defending federalism that he sometimes departs from text and tradition, and reveals that he has disagreed with other justices most often in decisions involving the meaning of the First Amendment's establishment clause. He also analyzes Scalia's positions on the commerce clause and habeas corpus clause of Article I, the take care clause of Article II, the criminal procedural provisions of Amendments Four through Eight, protection of state sovereign immunity in the Eleventh Amendment, and Congress's enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The first book to fully articulate the contours of Scalia's constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence, Rossum's insightful study ultimately depicts Scalia as a principled, consistent, and intelligent textualist who is fearless and resolute, notwithstanding the controversy he often inspires.

This handbook invites readers who are interested in mediation, negotiation and conflict resolution to share the perspectives of experts in the field.

Every so often, a startling book emerges that gives voice to a new or previously unexamined trend that is transforming society. Alan M. Dershowitz's provocative new work, Preemption, is just such a book, chronicling a paradigm shift in our approach to controlling destructive conduct. As he reveals, we are moving--whether in society's manner of fighting crime or in our response to terrorism--toward more preventive and proactive approaches and away from primary reliance on deterrent and reactive responses. Although the events of 9/11 have accelerated this revolutionary shift, Dershowitz compellingly documents that the seeds were planted much earlier. In this thought-provoking account, Dershowitz explores the historical origins of the change as well as its troubling implication for civil liberties, human rights, criminal justice, national security, and foreign policy.