Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Below The Surface: Comparing Legislative History Usage By The House Of Lords And The Supreme Court, James J. Brudney
Below The Surface: Comparing Legislative History Usage By The House Of Lords And The Supreme Court, James J. Brudney
ExpressO
Abstract for “Below the Surface: Comparing Legislative History Usage by the House of Lords and the Supreme Court
In 1992, the Law Lords (the judicial arm of the House of Lords) overruled more than two centuries of precedent when it decided in Pepper v. Hart that courts could refer to and rely on legislative history to aid in construing enacted laws. The ensuing fourteen years have witnessed a robust debate among British judges and legal scholars as to the scope and propriety of Pepper. This article offers the first empirical and comparative analysis of how Britain’s highest court has used …
Interrogation Of Detainees: Extending A Hand Or A Boot?, Amos N. Guiora
Interrogation Of Detainees: Extending A Hand Or A Boot?, Amos N. Guiora
ExpressO
The so called “war on terror” provides the Bush administration with a unique opportunity to both establish clear guidelines for the interrogation of detainees and to make a forceful statement about American values. How the government chooses to act can promote either an ethical commitment to the norms of civil society, or an attitude analogous to Toby Keith’s “American Way,” where Keith sings that “you’ll be sorry that you messed with the USofA, ‘Cuz we’ll put a boot in your ass, It’s the American Way.”
No aspect of the “war on terrorism” more clearly addresses this balance than coercive interrogation. …
Double-Consciousness In Constitutional Adjudication, Richard A. Primus
Double-Consciousness In Constitutional Adjudication, Richard A. Primus
Articles
Constitutional theorists are familiar with epistemic and consequentialist reasons why judges might allow their decision making to be shaped by strongly held public opinion. The epistemic approach treats public opinion as an expert indicator, while the consequentialistapproach counsels judges to compromise legally correct interpretations so as not to antagonize a hostile public. But there is also a third reason, which we can think ofas constitutive. In limited circumstances, the fact that the public strongly holds a given view can be one of the factors that together constitute the correct answer to a constitutional question. In those circumstances, what the public …
Of Metaphor, Metonymy, And Corporate Money: Rhetorical Choices In Supreme Court Decisions On Campaign Finance Regulation, Linda L. Berger
Of Metaphor, Metonymy, And Corporate Money: Rhetorical Choices In Supreme Court Decisions On Campaign Finance Regulation, Linda L. Berger
Linda L. Berger
No abstract provided.