検索キーワード： 司法制度

This is one of the true classics in world legal literature. Written by a master of law and language, it is a primary source book for anyone interested either in legal theory or political science. For the layman, it serves to clarify the very essence of the common law, the cornerstone of our present legal system.

The Supreme Court endorses terrorists' rights, flag burning, and importing foreign law. Is that in the Constitution? You're right: it's not. But these days the Constitution is no restraint on our out-of-control Supreme Court. The Court imperiously strikes down laws and imposes new ones purely on its own arbitrary whims. Even though liberals like John Kerry are repeatedly defeated at the polls, the majority on the allegedly "conservative" Supreme Court reflects their views and wields absolute power.

Bestselling author Jeffrey Toobin takes you into the chambers of the Supreme Court and reveals the complex dynamic among the nine people who decide the law of the land. Just in time for the 2008 presidential election–where the future of the Court will be at stake–Toobin reveals an...

Riforma giustizia, lavori in corso: Giustizia, trattativa in salita coi Cinquestelle. Il voto sulla riforma prima delle ferie e Draghi pensa alla fiducia, di Tommaso Ciriaco; Giustizia, la riforma slitta: gelo tra Cartabia e M5S. Torna l'ipotesi fiducia, di Tommaso Ciriaco e Liana Milella; Riforma della giustizia, il governo chiede il voto fiducia: "Evitiamo zone di impunità", di Liana Milella; Giustizia, Draghi congela la trattativa. Tensione tra i 5 Stelle, di Tommaso Ciriaco e Liana Milella.

Ottobre 2020: per la prima volta nella storia della magistratura un ex membro del Csm viene radiato dall'ordine giudiziario. Chi è Luca Palamara? Una carriera brillante avviata con la presidenza dell'Associazione nazionale magistrati a trentanove anni. A quarantacinque viene eletto nel Consiglio superiore della magistratura e, alla guida della corrente di centro, Unità per la Costituzione, contribuisce a determinare le decisioni dell'organo di autogoverno dei giudici.

Vor dem Gesetz sind alle gleich. Doch was geschieht, wenn geltendes Recht nicht mehr für jeden gilt und nicht ausnahmslos greift? Wenn gefällte Urteile nicht vollzogen werden? Wenn der Staat auf neue Entwicklungen in Zeiten von Digitalisierung und Globalisierung nicht angemessen reagiert? Wenn die Balance zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit zunehmend zu Lasten der Freiheit verloren geht? Wenn zwar der Sozialstaat weiter ausgebaut wird, die Kernaufgaben des Rechtsstaates aber vernachlässigt werden?

Nomine, spartizioni, accordi sottobanco fra le correnti. Tutto avvilente, per carità. Ma c'è ben altro, ben altre infezioni, nel corpo malato della corporazione togata. Comportamenti e azioni davanti a cui si resta interdetti e si fatica a trovare parole adeguate. Ci sono giudici che hanno depositato sentenze con mesi e mesi di ritardo e altri che hanno dimenticato in cella gli imputati per 51 giorni. Ci sono giudici che hanno chiamato i carabinieri per non pagare il conto al ristorante e altri che hanno smarrito pratiche e fascicoli, vanificando anni di processi.

Un giudice che ha il potere di controllare e annullare le leggi del Parlamento. Un giudice che, in caso di contrasti fra un ministro e il governo o fra una Regione e lo Stato, decide chi ha ragione. Organo fondamentale nel sistema di garanzie previsto dalla nostra Costituzione, la Corte costituzionale è un giudice molto particolare, in quanto nasce dall'esigenza di garantire che tutti, compreso il legislatore, rispettino la Costituzione.

Kaum ein Tag vergeht, ohne dass deutsche Gerichte skandalös anmutende Urteile fällen: Brutale Gewalttäter erhalten lächerlich milde Strafen, Wiederholungstäter entgehen längst fälligen Haftbefehlen, weil die Verfahren viel zu lange dauern, Freiheitsstrafen werden wieder und wieder zur Bewährung ausgesetzt. Das Vertrauen in unsere Justiz schwindet. Skandal- und Fehlurteile sind kein Zufall, sondern systembedingt, sagt Richter Thorsten Schleif. Unser Justizsystem versagt bereits lange vor den eigentlichen Verfahren, bei der Ausbildung und Auswahl seiner Richter.

If you can imagine it, somewhere there’s probably a law against it. Laugh out loud over some of Canada’s strangest laws - but not too loudly, or you might get a ticket: until 2002 in BC, you couldn’t stand up while having a drink in a restaurant; in Halifax, cabbies are required to wear socks; you’re not allowed to dogsled on the sidewalks in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario; and much more.

Will Sandeson seemed like a model son. A member of the Dalhousie University track and field team, he was about to start classes at Dalhousie’s medical school. He worked at a group home for adults with disabilities. He came from a good family. “There’s times for whatever reason that things don’t go quite as planned,” a Halifax police officer told Sandeson shortly after he was arrested for the first-degree murder of Taylor Samson, who also, on the surface, seemed like a model son.

In One Vote Away, you will discover how often the high court decisions that affect your life have been decided by just one vote. One vote preserves your right to speak freely, to bear arms, and to exercise your faith. One vote will determine whether your children enjoy their full inheritance as American citizens.

In Trust in a Polarized Age, political philosopher Kevin Vallier offers a powerful counter-narrative to the prevailing sense of hopelessness that dogs the American political landscape. In an unapologetic defense of liberalism that synthesizes political philosophy and empirical trust research, Vallier restores faith in our power to reduce polarization and rebuild social and political trust.  

 Presumed Guilty reveals how the Supreme Court allows the perpetuation of racist policing by presuming that suspects, especially people of color, are guilty. 

In 1981, after almost two centuries of exclusively male appointments, Sandra Day O'Connor became the first female Supreme Court Justice of the United States, a significant historical moment and a symbolic triumph for supporters of women's rights. Most do not know, however, about the remarkable women shortlisted for the Supreme Court in the decades before O'Connor's success. Since the 1930s, nine women were formally considered for a seat on the Supreme Court, but were ultimately passed over. Shortlisted gives them the recognition they deserve. 

In this deeply researched account, one of Washington's top legal reporters reveals the massive funding, sophisticated organization, and fanatical zeal behind the campaign to stop Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the nation's highest court.

Crimes and violations of the law require punishment, and our legal system is set up to punish, but what if the system was recalibrated to also weigh grounds for forgiveness? What if something like bankruptcy - a fresh start for debtors - were available to people convicted of crimes? Martha Minow explores the complicated intersection of the law, justice, and forgiveness, asking whether the law should encourage people to forgive, and when courts, public officials, and specific laws should forgive.  

The concept of habeas corpus - literally, to receive and hold the body - empowers courts to protect the right of prisoners to know the basis on which they are being held by the government and grant prisoners their freedom when they are held unlawfully. It is no wonder that habeas corpus has long been considered essential to freedom. 

16 Supreme Court cases have played an outsized role in answering these vital questions. You may know many by name - like Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, and Marbury v. Madison. But who were the people involved, and what issues were at stake? How have your life and your country changed because of these decisions? Join award-winning professor David L. Hudson on a riveting journey through these 16 monumental decisions. You will come away with a better understanding of American history, the legal system, and your individual freedoms.

Constitutional fundamentalists read the Constitution selectively and self-servingly. Fundamentalist interpretations of the Constitution elevate certain constitutional rights above all others, benefit the most powerful members of society, and undermine the integrity of the document as a whole. The conservative fetish for the Second Amendment (enforced by groups such as the NRA) provides an obvious example of constitutional fundamentalism; the liberal fetish for the First Amendment (enforced by groups such as the ACLU) is less obvious but no less influential.