<div class="raw-html-embed"><a href="https://libratech.ai/ch/?utm_source=partner&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_campaign=wkch_libra_prsp_staempfli_07_2026
">Stämpfli Fachinhalte - jetzt im rechtssicheren Libra All-In-One AI Workspace verfügbar - Jetzt kostenlos testen!</a></div>

Über uns

À propos de nous

Nachhaltigkeit

Durabilité

Open Access

Karriere

Carrière

Aboverträge Kündigen

Résiliation d’abonnement

Vertrag widerrufen

Résiliation de contrat 

Datenschutz

Protection des données

Impressum

Mentions légales

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

Publikationen

Publications

Literatur

Digitales Angebot

Bücher

Livres

Buchreihen

Collections

Onlinemodule LEXIA

Modules en ligne LEXIA

recht.ch

Studienliteratur

Littérature pour les études

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

Autorenstimmen

Témoignages

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

Unsere Funktionen

Nos fonctions

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

Examensarbeit aus dem Jahr 2024 im Fachbereich Jura - Öffentliches Recht / Staatsrecht / Grundrechte, Ruhr-Universität Bochum (Juristische Fakultät), Veranstaltung: Europäisches Wirtschaftsrecht, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: In dieser umfassenden Seminararbeit wird die Klimaschutzkonzeption des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte (EGMR) und des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (BVerfG) eingehend analysiert. Die Arbeit beleuchtet die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen und die Entwicklung der relevanten Rechtsprechung, die den Schutz der Menschenrechte im Kontext des Klimawandels behandelt.

Durch eine vergleichende Analyse der Ansätze beider Gerichte werden Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede herausgearbeitet, um die Wirksamkeit ihrer Entscheidungen in der Klimapolitik zu bewerten. Herausforderungen und rechtliche Grenzen werden ebenfalls thematisiert, wobei der Fokus auf den politischen Implikationen der Urteile liegt. Diese Seminararbeit bietet eine tiefgehende Analyse der Klimaschutzkonzeption des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte (EGMR) und des Bundesverfassungsgerichts (BVerfG) mit einem besonderen Fokus auf das Recht auf chancengerechte Freiheitsverteilung. Sie untersucht die wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen, die diese Konzepte untermauern, sowie die Gewaltenteilung zwischen dem Bundestag und dem BVerfG in Bezug auf die Klimapolitik.

Die Arbeit beleuchtet die Versubjektivierung von Artikel 20a GG und diskutiert die Schaffung eines neuen Grundrechts im Grundgesetz, das dem Klimaschutz eine verfassungsrechtliche Basis verleiht. Zudem wird die Debatte über die Aufnahme des Pariser Abkommens im Grundgesetz thematisiert und dessen potenzielle Auswirkungen auf die deutsche Klimapolitik.

Diese Seminararbeit bietet eine fundierte Grundlage für alle, die sich mit der Schnittstelle von Recht, Klimaschutz und Menschenrechten auseinandersetzen möchten. Sie eignet sich ideal für Studierende der Rechtswissenschaften, Umweltpolitik und verwandter Fachrichtungen. Nutzen Sie die Gelegenheit, in ein aktuelles und relevantes Thema einzutauchen und Ihre Kenntnisse zu erweitern!

Henry Stock-Schröer

Zur grundrechtsdogmatischen "Klimaschutz-Konzeption" von Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte und Bundesverfassungsgericht

Academic Paper from the year 2024 in the subject Law - Public Law / Constitutional Law / Basic Rights, University of Buea, language: English, abstract: This article delves into the longstanding issue of pre-trial detention, tracing its origins back to the colonial era in Cameroon, where individuals were held in custody pending trial outcomes. It examines the extent to which pre-trial detainees' rights are safeguarded in Cameroon, revealing significant violations within the current legal framework. Notably, the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of Cameroon falls short in adequately protecting the right to bail, leaving its discretion to the courts.

Employing qualitative research methodology, the study conducts a comprehensive doctrinal analysis of conventions, statutes, and cases. Findings indicate that while Cameroon's Constitution and CPC offer certain protections, these provisions are deemed insufficient, calling for reform. The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Cameroon's legal system in upholding prisoners' rights.

In clarifying the term "pre-trial," the article underscores its global prevalence across Europe and Africa, encompassing diverse demographics—from first-time offenders to the mentally ill and career criminals. The history of pre-trial detention in Cameroon is rooted in colonial practices, where detainees were coerced into administrative labor.

Post-World War I, there emerged heightened awareness of human dignity, catalyzing initiatives like the League of Nations' International Penal and Penitentiary Commission, which advocated for proper detainee treatment. Subsequently, the United Nations inherited this mission, emphasizing human dignity through international legal instruments, which are analyzed in the study.

Three justifications for pre-trial detention are outlined: reasonable belief in the alleged perpetrator's guilt, flight risk, and potential obstruction of justice. Fundamental human rights, including liberty, are emphasized, with acknowledgment of widespread unlawful arrests, lack of legal counsel, and inhumane treatment in many countries.

This article underscores the urgent need to reform Cameroon's legal framework, advocating for amendments to clarify ambiguous provisions, define undefined terms, and bolster lacking safeguards. By addressing these deficiencies, the study aims to enhance protections for pre-trial detainees and uphold fundamental rights within Cameroon's justice system.

Sona Gerald

The Protection of the Rights of Pre-trial Detainees in Cameroon. A Legal Perspective

Contemporary Debates

This volume explores the many ways in which politics shapes the allegedly nonpartisan judicial system in America, ranging from how judges are selected to the bench to how they rule when they get there.

Each title in the Contemporary Debates series examines the veracity of controversial claims or beliefs surrounding a major political/cultural issue in the United States. Each book gives readers a clear and unbiased understanding of current high-interest issues by informing them about falsehoods, half-truths, and misconceptions - and confirming the factual validity of other assertions - that have gained traction in America's cultural and political discourse.

This volume in the series provides a deeply researched and even-handed account of the relationship between America's judicial branch - which is supposed to view law through a nonpartisan lens - and the sometimes poisonous partisanship that is such a notorious factor in the nation's other two branches of government. Is political combat over judicial nominations worse than ever before? What impact is the politicization of the courts having on public faith in the legitimacy of the courts and our wider political system? Was former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day right when she asserted that "judicial independence is a bedrock principle of our court system, and we are losing it"? This work will provide insights into all these questions and more.

Examining the Facts

Political Control of America's Courts

Modern Studies in European Law

This book offers a comprehensive examination of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and its engagement with public international law. It explores how the Court has developed a flexible, context-dependent approach to international law, which seeks to balance the autonomy of the EU legal order with the necessity of recognising and integrating international legal principles. Rather than focusing on landmark cases, the book analyses the CJEU's jurisprudence thematically, exploring the various ways the Court encounters and engages with international law. These include the use of international law as a source and inspiration of EU law, as a method of challenging the validity of EU law, and as method of interpretation. The book goes beyond analysis of the judgments and explores the broader context in which the Court navigates its relationship with international law. It examines the circumstances under which the Court establishes barriers around the EU legal order, such as when it develops the principle of autonomy, and when it builds bridges with the international legal order, such as when it seeks to engage with and develop international law principles. This book will be of interest to scholars, practitioners, and students focused on the intersections of EU law and public international law, contributing to ongoing debates about legal pluralism and the evolving dynamics of intersecting legal frameworks.

The Court of Justice of the EU and Public International Law

Analysis of the new phenomenon of using of Social Media in Legal Service

Legal Service via Social Media. What could possibly go wrong?

Should German property law be adapted to the changed economic realities and in the future cover not only tangible but also intangible objects? Jan Felix Hoffmann examines this question by taking into account French, Austrian and Belgian property law. The latest discussions on crypto assets are also factored into the analysis.

Sachbegriff und Eigentumsordnung

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?

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

 Anonymous

Geschlechtergerechte Sprache in der öffentlichen Verwaltung. Verfassungsrechtliche Gebotenheit und praktische Grenzen

Is reading a statute or constitutional provision the same act as reading an email or a text message? This book analyses and develops legal communicative theories which answer in the affirmative - language, not morality or fairness, is the primary consideration for legal interpretation. According to these theories, the aim of legal interpretation is to focus on what was communicated through language. Despite what seems like a simple picture, it is hard to pin down what a legal communicative theory is; even its proponents think that some normative reasoning is necessary when interpreting vague or indeterminate provisions. Opponents of legal communicative theories claim normativity is always present regardless of vagueness or linguistic indeterminacy. Both sides agree that theories of legal interpretation have to be justified by rich normative arguments. Where should a legal communicative theorist draw the line between communication and normativity? The book shows how we can construct legal communicative theories in a way that maintains the communicative nature of such theories whilst acknowledging that some normative reasoning is inevitable. By working out relevant criteria for legal communicative theories, the book additionally presents a sophisticated account of intentionalism and original intent grounded in the philosophy of language and linguistics: application subjectivism.

Communication and Legal Interpretation

&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Finalist, 2025 PROSE Awards: Legal Studies and Criminology&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;br&gt;
        A history of the humble footnote and its impact on the highest court in the land&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
    In May 2022, a seismic legal event occurred as the draft majority opinion in &lt;i&gt;Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health&lt;/i&gt; was leaked. The majority aimed to eliminate constitutional protection for abortion. Amidst the fervor, an unnoticed detail emerged: over 140 footnotes accompanied the majority opinion and dissent. These unassuming annotations held immense significance, unveiling justices’ beliefs about the Constitution’s essence, highlighting their controversial reasoning, and laying bare the vastly different interpretations of the role of Supreme Court Justice.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;i&gt;The Supreme Court Footnote &lt;/i&gt;offers a study of the evolution of footnotes in US Supreme Court opinions and how they add to our constitutional understanding. Through a comprehensive analysis, Peter Charles Hoffer argues that as justices alter the course of history via their decisions, they import their own understandings of it through the footnotes. The book showcases how the role of the footnote within Supreme Court opinions has evolved, beginning with one of the first cases in the history of the court, &lt;i&gt;Chisholm v. Georgia&lt;/i&gt; in 1792 (a case concerning federalism vs. states’ rights) and ending with the landmark &lt;i&gt;Dobbs v. Jackson&lt;/i&gt; case in 2022. Along the way, Hoffer demonstrates how the footnotes within these decisions reflect the changing role of the Supreme Court Justice, along with how interpretations of the constitution have transformed over time.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
    At once surprising and revealing, &lt;i&gt;The Supreme Court Footnote&lt;/i&gt; proves that what appears below the line is not only a unique window into the history of constitutional law but also a source of insight as to how the court will act going forward.&lt;/p&gt;

Peter Charles Hoffer

A Surprising History

The Supreme Court Footnote

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

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

Weitere Titel zum Thema