Taking the Constitution Away from the CourtsPrinceton University Press, 24 Jul 2000 - 256 halaman Here a leading scholar in constitutional law, Mark Tushnet, challenges hallowed American traditions of judicial review and judicial supremacy, which allow U.S. judges to invalidate "unconstitutional" governmental actions. Many people, particularly liberals, have "warm and fuzzy" feelings about judicial review. They are nervous about what might happen to unprotected constitutional provisions in the chaotic worlds of practical politics and everyday life. By examining a wide range of situations involving constitutional rights, Tushnet vigorously encourages us all to take responsibility for protecting our liberties. Guarding them is not the preserve of judges, he maintains, but a commitment of the citizenry to define itself as "We the People of the United States." The Constitution belongs to us collectively, as we act in political dialogue with each other--whether in the street, in the voting booth, or in the legislature as representatives of others. |
Dari dalam buku
Hasil 1-5 dari 19
... veto to offset the power it had delegated to executive officials. The legislative veto comes in several variants, but its basic idea is this: Congress gives broad authority to an executive official to act; it then sees what the official ...
... vetoed the proposal. He told Congress that the “opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion ... veto laws and pardon people for policy as well as constitutional reasons. Even if we somehow devised ways of ...
... veto of the bank recharter, for example, prefaced its constitutional argument with several arguments that the bank was a bad idea because, among other things, it gave too much power to its private owners. And finally, Jefferson and ...
Anda telah mencapai batas penampilan buku ini.
Anda telah mencapai batas penampilan buku ini.