Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy pdf epub mobi txt 電子書 下載2025
- 美國政治
- 美國憲法
- 政治學
- 司法
- 美國史
- 法學
- 法哲學
- 憲法學
Should the Supreme Court have the last word when it comes to interpreting the Constitution? The justices on the Supreme Court certainly seem to think so - and their critics say that this position threatens democracy. But Keith Whittington argues that the Court's justices have not simply seized power and circumvented politics. The justices have had power thrust upon them - by politicians, for the benefit of politicians. In this sweeping political history of judicial supremacy in America, Whittington shows that presidents and political leaders of all stripes have worked to put the Court on a pedestal and have encouraged its justices to accept the role of ultimate interpreters of the Constitution. Whittington examines why presidents have often found judicial supremacy to be in their best interest, why they have rarely assumed responsibility for interpreting the Constitution, and why constitutional leadership has often been passed to the courts. The unprecedented assertiveness of the Rehnquist Court in striking down acts of Congress is only the most recent example of a development that began with the founding generation itself. Presidential bids for constitutional leadership have been rare, but reflect the temporary political advantage in doing so. Far more often, presidents have cooperated in increasing the Court's power and encouraging its activism. Challenging the conventional wisdom that judges have usurped democracy, Whittington shows that judicial supremacy is the product of democratic politics.
具體描述
讀後感
用戶評價
好書啊，司法政治學領域中位數不多的不強調法院與其他政治機構根本衝突的著作，他自己援引瞭Robert Dahl and Mark Graber，但我覺得也在一定程度上彌補瞭Robert Kagan的見解。區彆在於，Kagan的視角更加偏嚮社會學和曆史製度主義。
评分好書啊，司法政治學領域中位數不多的不強調法院與其他政治機構根本衝突的著作，他自己援引瞭Robert Dahl and Mark Graber，但我覺得也在一定程度上彌補瞭Robert Kagan的見解。區彆在於，Kagan的視角更加偏嚮社會學和曆史製度主義。
评分好書啊，司法政治學領域中位數不多的不強調法院與其他政治機構根本衝突的著作，他自己援引瞭Robert Dahl and Mark Graber，但我覺得也在一定程度上彌補瞭Robert Kagan的見解。區彆在於，Kagan的視角更加偏嚮社會學和曆史製度主義。
评分好書啊，司法政治學領域中位數不多的不強調法院與其他政治機構根本衝突的著作，他自己援引瞭Robert Dahl and Mark Graber，但我覺得也在一定程度上彌補瞭Robert Kagan的見解。區彆在於，Kagan的視角更加偏嚮社會學和曆史製度主義。
评分好書啊，司法政治學領域中位數不多的不強調法院與其他政治機構根本衝突的著作，他自己援引瞭Robert Dahl and Mark Graber，但我覺得也在一定程度上彌補瞭Robert Kagan的見解。區彆在於，Kagan的視角更加偏嚮社會學和曆史製度主義。
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 onlinetoolsland.com All Rights Reserved. 本本书屋 版权所有