Good Behaviour: The Supreme Court and Article III of the United States ConstitutionSunstone Press, 2001 - 108 halaman The controversy surrounding the presidential election in 2000 raised many issues regarding the behavior of some of the United States Supreme Court Justices. The Court's decision in the case of Bush v. Gore effectively stopped a recount of votes in Florida. Many critics felt this decision was politically motivated. If so, what did this say about the ability of the members of the Court to remain non-partisan? And, can justices be removed from office even though it is assumed that they are appointed for life? Samuel A. Francis, an Albuquerque, New Mexico attorney examines all these issues and takes a hard look at what "good Behaviour" (original spelling) in Article III of the United States Constitution might mean for the justices in light of events of December 2000. In this concise book, the author also gives a brief history of the Supreme Court, a detailed appraisal of the case of Bush v. Gore, and includes the full text to the United States Constitution. |
Dari dalam buku
Hasil 1-4 dari 4
... criminal laws but his judicial behavior was described as not being good . There was uncertainty regarding the standard to apply to the impeachment charges . The behavior of Justice Chase was challenged as violating the " good Behaviour ...
Anda telah mencapai batas penampilan buku ini.
Anda telah mencapai batas penampilan buku ini.
Anda telah mencapai batas penampilan buku ini.
Isi
7 | |
21 | |
The Constitutions Separation of Power | 29 |
The Case of Bush v GoreDecember 2000 | 49 |
The Most Powerful Branch of the United States | 63 |
Edisi yang lain - Lihat semua
Good Behavior: The Supreme Court and Article III of the United States ... Samuel A. Francis Pratinjau tidak tersedia - 2001 |