Über uns

À propos de nous

Open Access

Karriere

Carrière

Aboverträge Kündigen

Résiliation d’abonnement

Vertrag widerrufen

Résiliation de contrat 

Datenschutz

Protection des données

Impressum

Mentions légales

Barrierefreiheit

Accessibilité

Zahlung und Lieferung

Paiement et livraison

Libra

Was ist Libra?

C'est quoi Libra ?

Kostenlos testen

Tester gratuitement

LEXIA

LEXIA Arbeitsrecht

Was ist LEXIA?

C'est quoi LEXIA ?

LEXIA Familienrecht

Zeitschriften

Revues

recht

Pflegerecht

ZBJV

forumpoenale

ZStrR

Anwaltsrevue

Revue de l'avocat

RSAS

FamPra.ch

ASYL

Life Science Recht

BlAR

Sachbuch

Livres spécialisés

LOKI

Semaphor

Fokusthemen

Focus

Thema

Recht studieren

Arbeitsrecht

Droit du travail

Studium

Études

Familienrecht

Droit de la famille

Sozialversicherungsrecht

Droit des assurances sociales

Strafrecht

Droit pénal

Aktienrecht

Droit des sociétés anonymes

Persönlichkeitsrecht

Droit de la personnalité

Publikationen

Publications

Literatur

Digitales Angebot

Bücher

Livres

Buchreihen

Collections

Onlinemodule LEXIA

Modules en ligne LEXIA

recht.ch

Studienliteratur

Littérature pour les études

Swisslex

Dienstleistungen

Services

Dienstleistungen für

Corporate Books

Publishing Lösungen

Aktuelles

Geschäftskunden

Professionnels

Corporate Publishing

Content solutions

Buchhandlungen

Librairies

Veranstaltungen

Événements

Presse

Dozierende

Enseignants

Studierende

Étudiants

Inserierende

Annonceurs

Newsletter

Blog

Autorinnen/Autoren

Auteurs

Unsere Schreibenden

Hilfe

Unsere Autorinnen und Autoren

Liste

Autorenlounge

Espace des auteurs

Bei uns publizieren

Publier chez nous

Open Access Policy

Verlag

Éditions

Themen

Mehr wissen

Mitarbeitende

Collaborateurs

Geschichte

Histoire

Unser Magazin

Notre magazine

Vision und Mission

Vision et mission

Partner

Partenaires

Unternehmenskultur

Culture d'entreprise

Kontakt

Contact

Shop

Schweizer Recht

Ausländisches Recht

Über unseren Shop

Neuerscheinungen

Nouveautés

Sortiment & Suche

Catalogue & Recherche

Vorankündigungen

À paraître

Nach Rechtsgebiet

Par domaine juridique

Kommentare

Commentaires

Gesamtkatalog

Catalogue complet

Fachkatalog Recht

Catalogue de droit

Aus der Reihe: e-fellows.net stipendiaten-wissen

Isabelle Bayreuther

Originalism and Judicial Discretion. A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Interpretation in the United States

This socio-legal text examines the role of judges as agents of social change and the societal impact of their decisions. Drawing on first-hand experiences, informant narratives, and historical insights, it explores the Nigerian judiciary, judicial discretion, precedent, and courts' societal role. The book argues that judges should interpret justice with social interests, social and judicial empathy, and evolving contexts in mind, rather than strictly adhering to precedent. With a pragmatic approach and clear diagrams, it challenges judicial stereotypes and emphasizes the need for 'appropriate' discretion that aligns with the public understanding of justice. This book highlights the courts' critical role in shaping societal development by addressing the interplay between law and society. Its interdisciplinary and humanitarian approach offers fresh perspectives on how judicial decision-making affects the public and sparks a long-overdue debate on interpreting justice in a changing world.

"With her unique Socio-Judicial Approach, the author boldly reimagines judging as a democratic and socially engaged process. A thought-provoking work of wide relevance."
 - Hon. Chief Judge Kashim Zannah (President, Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute (CJEI), Chief Judge, Borno State, Nigeria)
"This book recalls Cardozo's "The Nature of the Judicial Process"-a powerful compliment. A profound and timely contribution to understanding judging in today's world."
 - Dr. Malcolm M. Feeley (Professor Emeritus, UC Berkeley School of Law)
"A masterful exploration of discretion and interpretation, reinforcing the idea of courts as agents of social change. A valuable resource for judges and scholars."
<blockquote>
- Hon. Justice Amina Adamu Augie, Rtd. JSC (Justice, The Supreme Court of Nigeria)
</blockquote>

A Matter of Interpretation and Judicial Discretion

The Act of Judging in Nigeria

With Congress paralyzed, lawmaking falls to executive agencies and courts that interpret existing statutes. Due to the so-called Chevron doctrine, courts generally defer to agencies. Thomas Merrill examines the immense consequences of the doctrine and the intense backlash, offering a new way to conceptualize the authority of agencies and courts.

Its Rise and Fall, and the Future of the Administrative State

The Chevron Doctrine

Essay from the year 2024 in the subject Law - Public Law / Constitutional Law / Basic Rights, , language: English, abstract: The global refugee crisis has presented a formidable challenge to the traditional understanding of state sovereignty and the control of national borders. While sovereignty affords States the right to control their borders and protect their nationals, States also have a humanitarian obligation to respect the human rights and dignity of refugees, who are often people fleeing from persecution, violence and abject poverty. This research explores the complex interplay between state sovereignty and humanitarian obligations in the context of refugee protection, by exploring the legal, ethical, and political dimensions of the issue. It argues that sovereignty should not be seen as an absolute or fixed concept, but rather as a dynamic and relational one, that is shaped by the changing realities and norms of the international community. By balancing sovereignty with the humanitarian obligation to protect refugees, this research also proposes a balanced approach that respects the rights of sovereign states while addressing the urgent needs of refugees. The research concludes that the legal framework which governs refugees, continues to be characterized on the one hand, by, the principles of state sovereignty and related territorial supremacy, self-defense, and self-preservation; and on the other hand by competing humanitarian principles, derived from general international law (including the purposes and principles of the United Nations) and treaty law.

Martin Nimbom

Balancing State Sovereignty with Refugees Rights under International Law

Publisher's Weekly praised Black Mondays: "Unlike Thurgood Marshall's opinion in the foreword that the framers of the nstitution should be blamed for its inequities and compromises involving slavery and women, constitutional authority Joseph asserts that its misinterpretation by Supreme Court justices, rather than the document itself, was responsible for such erroneous decisions as the Dred Scott case, which, he alleges, helped precipitate the Civil War. The case is among what he considers the court's 20 "worst" decisions as selected by legal associations and law professors, either because they reflect poor reasoning or adversely affect the freedom of citizens. The cases and the cited dissents, which make instructive reading, concern freedom of religion, association, speech, right to privacy, equal protection under the law, criminal rights and access to justice. Included are the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson 'Jim Crow' case, and the Il internment of citizens of Japanese origin, Georgia sodomy laws, Ralph Ginzburg's obscenity conviction and a June 1987 decision involving an FBI search of a black family in their Minnesota home, which, in the author's view, undercuts the Fourth Amendment guarantee of liberty and privacy." 
Israeli Supreme Court Justice Eliezer Rivlin called Black Mondays "A masterpiece."
Black Mondays includes 50 of the worst decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, from Dred Scot to Trump v. United States.

Black Mondays Sixth Edition

A leading legal scholar asks a fundamental question: Do we need a theory of constitutional interpretation?

Judicial Craft versus Constitutional Theory

Who Am I to Judge?

This book examines the history, theories and legal principles underpinning the rules and practice of civil litigation in England and Wales. English civil procedure has been the object of renewed interest in the last 20 years since Lord Woolf proposed and implemented reforms of the civil justice system on a scale unequalled since the mid-19th century. Focusing on the overarching theoretical framework of civil procedure, this book provides a rigorous contextual analysis of the rules and practice of civil litigation in England and Wales and identifies the applicable rule of process and its rationale and connection to these rules and determines the scope of judicial discretion and regulatory flexibility. Chapter 1 sets out the core themes of the work, Chapter 2 provides the important historical background to modern English rules of court. Chapter 3 focuses on the rules of court as addressed to and concerning the litigant. This chapter therefore presents the 'fundamental principles' as the 'promises' by the state to litigants, that their rights will be enforced. It addresses the nature of a civil lawsuit and of the right to sue itself, whether private, that is, part of the litigant's "estate" either directly or as an extension of his other property at stake, or public, as the forum for the determination of the substantive law albeit in an individualized context. This also includes a discussion of the need for - or existence of, in all but name - separation between civil and administrative adjudication. Chapter 4 identifies the current theories of justice determining the function of the civil court in English law and their application to discrete moments of litigation but from the perspective of the way in which the judges conducting the litigation have their role and power reflected and amplified in the rules. Chapters 5 and 6 addresses the nature of the result of litigation, primarily the judgment (but also other types of final adjudicative decisions) and its characters, and the possibilities and nature of appeals in the current system. Chapter 7 considers the result of litigation in the notoriously difficult and uneven area of enforcement of final judgments.

Public and Private Functions of the English Court

Civil Procedure

Janny Hochheim

Rechtliche Voraussetzungen und mögliche Auswirkungen eines Parteiverbots

Parteiverbotsverfahren gegen die AfD

Challenging decades of scholarship and Supreme Court jurisprudence, newly discovered historical documents reveal that the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause was meant to protect only the freedom to worship, not broader rights of conscience. The First Amendment proclaims that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This language has been taken to provide sweeping constitutional protection for the freedom of belief and the freedom to act on one's beliefs, underpinning conscience-based claims by people seeking to avoid military service, mandatory schooling for their children, or being required to work on the Sabbath. Recently, religious traditionalists have appealed to the Free Exercise Clause to seek exemptions from laws connected with abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage. In The Free Exercise Clause and the Rights of Conscience, Donald Drakeman demonstrates that such readings of the First Amendment are dramatically overbroad. Numerous newly available sources clearly show that when the Bill of Rights was ratified, Americans understood "free exercise of religion" as a well-established term of art referring solely to the ability to hold public worship services. That meaning remained unchanged well into the twentieth century. Time and again, when believers asked the courts for conscience-based exemptions from statutes, judges turned them down, telling them to address the legislature instead. It was only in the mid-twentieth century that the Supreme Court radically reimagined the Free Exercise Clause, granting religious exemptions from statutory duties for the first time in American history. As a result, today's Free Exercise Clause bears little resemblance to that of the framers and the American tradition of religious liberty. Given the current Supreme Court's heavy emphasis on original meaning and tradition when interpreting the Constitution, Drakeman's discovery could have significant implications for the future of conscience-based exemptions and the First Amendment itself.

The Free Exercise Clause and the Rights of Conscience

Alexander Khomich

Hintergrund, Anwendungsfelder, Kritik und aktuelle Entwicklungen

Der Grundsatz der Verhältnismäßigkeit aus grundgesetzlicher Perspektive

Sam Alito and the Triumph of the Conservative Legal Movement

Revenge for the Sixties

Telling the crucial and under-studied story of the U.S. legal doctrines that underpin the dispossession and domination of Indigenous peoples, this book enhances global Indigenous movements for self-determination. In this wide-ranging historical study of federal Indian law-the field of U.S. law related to Native peoples-attorney and educator Peter P. d'Errico argues that the U.S. government's assertion of absolute prerogative and unlimited authority over Native peoples and their lands is actually a suspension of law. Combining a deep theoretical analysis of the law with a historical examination of its roots in Christian civilization, d'Errico presents a close reading of foundational legal cases and raises the possibility of revoking the doctrine of domination. The book's larger context is the increasing frequency of Indigenous conflicts with nation-states around the world as ecological crises caused by industrial extraction impinge drastically on Indigenous peoples' existences. D'Errico rethinks the role of law in the global order-imagining an Indigenous nomos of the earth, an order arising from peoples and places rather than the existing hegemony of states.

The Legal Entrapment of Indigenous Peoples

Federal Anti-Indian Law

Yale Law Library Series in Legal History and Reference

A detailed and compelling examination of how the legal theory of originalism ignores and distorts the very constitutional history from which it derives interpretive authority &nbsp; "What are the chances that, in 2024, a new book could fundamentally reorient how we understand America's founding? Jonathan Gienapp . . . has written such a book. . . . You read it, and you get vertigo. . . . Gienapp's book comes as a thunderclap."-Cass Sunstein, Washington Post &nbsp; Winner of the Order of the Coif Book Award, 2025 ¿ &nbsp;Longlisted for the Cundill History Prize, 2025&nbsp;¿&nbsp;History Today Book of the Year, 2024 &nbsp; Constitutional originalism stakes law to history. The theory's core tenet-that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning-has us decide questions of modern constitutional law by consulting the distant constitutional past. Yet originalist engagement with history is often deeply problematic. And now that a majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court champion originalism, the task of scrutinizing originalists' use and abuse of history has never been more urgent. &nbsp; In this comprehensive and novel critique of originalism, Jonathan Gienapp targets originalists' unspoken assumptions about the Constitution and its history. Originalists are committed to recovering the Constitution laid down at the American Founding, yet they often assume that the Constitution is fundamentally modern. Rather than recovering the original Constitution, they project their own understandings onto it, assuming that eighteenth-century constitutional thinking was no different than their own. They take for granted what it meant to write a constitution down, what law was, how it worked, and where it came from, and how a constitution's meaning was fixed. In the process, they erase the Constitution that eighteenth-century Americans in fact created. By understanding how originalism fails, we can better understand the Constitution that we have.

A Historical Critique

Against Constitutional Originalism

Originalism and Judicial Discretion. A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Interpretation in the United States

Autres titres sur ce thème