Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (5)
- History (3)
- New Deal (3)
- Constitution (2)
- Police (2)
-
- Betts v. Brady (1)
- Caseloads (1)
- Confessions (1)
- Constitutional history (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Court-packing (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- David Schwartz (1)
- Decision making (1)
- Enumerated powers (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Florida (1)
- Gideon v. Wainwright (1)
- Innocence (1)
- John Marshall (1)
- Juries (1)
- Justice (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legal texts (1)
- Legislative jurisdiction (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Low income individuals (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
Marshaling Mcculloch, Richard A. Primus
Marshaling Mcculloch, Richard A. Primus
Reviews
David Schwartz’s terrific new book is subtitled John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. Maryland. But the book is about much more than Marshall and McCulloch. It’s bout the long struggle over the scope of national power. Marshall and McCulloch are characters in the story, but the story isn’t centrally about them. Indeed, an important part of Schwartz’s narrative is that McCulloch has mattered relatively little in that struggle, except as a protean symbol.
Gideon V. Wainwright A Half Century Later, Yale Kamisar
Gideon V. Wainwright A Half Century Later, Yale Kamisar
Reviews
When he was nearing the end of his distinguished career, one of my former law professors observed that a dramatic story of a specific case "has the same advantages that a play or a novel has over a general discussion of ethics or political theory." Ms. Houppert illustrates this point in her very first chapter.
The Constitution And The New Deal, Richard D. Friedman
The Constitution And The New Deal, Richard D. Friedman
Reviews
The Supreme Court of the New Deal era continues to captivate American lawyers and historians. Constitutional jurisprudence changed rapidly during the period. Moreover, some of the most significant changes appeared - whatever the reality - to result from pressure imposed in 1937 by President Franklin Roosevelt's plan to pack the Court with Justices amenable to his programme. The structure of constitutional law that emerged within a few years of Roosevelt's death remains intact in significant respects today.
...A Rendezvous With Kreplach: Putting The New Deal Court In Context, Richard D. Friedman
...A Rendezvous With Kreplach: Putting The New Deal Court In Context, Richard D. Friedman
Reviews
The Supreme Court of the New Deal era continues to captivate lawyers and historians. Constitutional jurisprudence changed rapidly during the period. Moreover, some of the most significant changes seemed--whatever the reality--to result from pressure imposed in 1937 by President Franklin Roosevelt's plan to pack the Court. The structure of constitutional law that emerged within a few years of Roosevelt's death remains intact in significant respects today.
Taking Decisions Seriously, Richard D. Friedman
Taking Decisions Seriously, Richard D. Friedman
Reviews
The New Deal era is one of the great turning points of American constitutional history. The receptivity of the Supreme Court to regulation by state and federal governments increased dra- matically during that period. The constitutionalism that prevailed before Charles Evans Hughes became Chief Justice in 1930 was similar in most respects to that of the beginning of the twen- tieth century. The constitutionalism that prevailed by the time Hughes’ successor Harlan Fiske Stone died in 1946 is far more related to that of the end of the century. How this transformation occurred is a crucial and enduring issue in …
Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar
Miranda: The Case, The Man, And The Players, Yale Kamisar
Reviews
On the eve of America's bicentennial, the American Bar Association told its members of a plan to publish a book about the "milestone events" in 200 years of American legal history, and invited them to vote on the milestones to be included. When the balloting was over, Miranda v. Arizona1 - "the high-water mark" of the Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure2 - had received the fourth highest number of votes.3 I venture to say that if members of the general public had been asked to list the "most regrettable" or "most unfortunate" milestones in American legal history, Miranda …