-
Civil Rights Litigation: Cases and Perspectives
Roy L. Brooks, Gilbert Paul Carrasco, and Michael Selmi
The third edition of Civil Rights Litigation retains the basic organization and many distinctive features of the previous editions, including its broad coverage and diversity of viewpoints. Brooks, Carrasco, and Selmi expose students to many different forms of discrimination, including education, housing, employment, voting, disability, language and ethnicity, police activities, and affirmative action. The book’s opening chapter offers a historic overview of civil rights litigation and raises several recurring themes in civil rights theory, including race versus class, the identity question, civil rights perspectives, and “anti-civil rights” perspectives.
As in the previous editions, cases are presented with a minimum amount of editing to facilitate sophisticated class discussion or role-playing in which students argue the cases in class. Principal changes in the third edition include the usual updating of cases and secondary material as well as the restructuring of sections in several chapters.
-
NAFTA and free trade in the Americas: a problem-oriented coursebook
Ralph H. Folsom, Michael W. Gordon, and David A. Gantz
-
The Rule of Rules: Morality, Rules, and the Dilemmas of Law
Larry Alexander and Emily Sherwin
Rules perform a moral function by restating moral principles in concrete terms, so as to reduce the uncertainty, error, and controversy that result when individuals follow their own unconstrained moral judgment. Although reason dictates that we must follow rules to avoid destructive error and controversy, rules—and hence laws—are imperfect, and reason also dictates that we ought not follow them when we believe they produce the wrong result in a particular case. In The Rule of Rules Larry Alexander and Emily Sherwin examine this dilemma. Once the importance of this moral and practical conflict is acknowledged, the authors argue, authoritative rules become the central problems of jurisprudence. The inevitable gap between rules and background morality cannot be bridged, they claim, although many contemporary jurisprudential schools of thought are misguided attempts to do so. Alexander and Sherwin work through this dilemma, which lies at the heart of such ongoing jurisprudential controversies as how judges should reason in deciding cases, what effect should be given to legal precedent, and what status, if any, should be accorded to “legal principles.” In the end, their rigorous discussion sheds light on such topics as the nature of interpretation, the ancient dispute among legal theorists over natural law versus positivism, the obligation to obey law, constitutionalism, and the relation between law and coercion
-
Civil Rights Litigation: Cases and Materials
Roy L. Brooks, Gilbert Paul Carrasco, and Michael Selmi
-
Shaping the Sierra: nature, culture, and conflict in the changing west
Timothy P. Duane and University of California Press
Timothy P. Duane documents the impact of rapid population growth on the culture, economy, and ecology of the Sierra Nevada since the late 1960s. He also recommends innovative policies for mitigating the negative effects of future population growth in this spectacular but threatened region, as well as throughout the rural west.
-
When Sorry Isn't Enough The Controversy Over Apologies and Reparations for Human Injustice
Roy L. Brooks
"How much compensation ought to be paid to a woman who was raped 7,500 times? What would the members of the Commission want for their daughters if their daughters had been raped even once?"—Karen Parker, speaking before the U.N. Commission on Human Rights
Seemingly every week, a new question arises relative to the current worldwide ferment over human injustices. Why does the U.S. offer $20,000 atonement money to Japanese Americans relocated to concentration camps during World War II, while not even apologizing to African Americans for 250 years of human bondage and another century of institutionalized discrimination? How can the U.S. and Canada best grapple with the genocidal campaigns against Native Americans on which their countries were founded? How should Japan make amends to Korean "comfort women" sexually enslaved during World War II? Why does South Africa deem it necessary to grant amnesty to whites who tortured and murdered blacks under apartheid? Is Germany's highly praised redress program, which has paid billions of dollars to Jews worldwide, a success, and, as such, an example for others? More generally, is compensation for a historical wrong dangerous "blood money" that allows a nation to wash its hands forever of its responsibility to those it has injured?
A rich collection of essays from leading scholars, pundits, activists, and political leaders the world over, many written expressly for this volume, When Sorry Isn't Enough also includes the voices of the victims of some of the world's worst atrocities, thereby providing a panoramic perspective on an international controversy often marked more by heat than reason.
-
A practical guide to California evidence: objections, responses, rules, and practice commentary
Allen C. Snyder, Anthony J. Bocchino, David A. Sonenshein, and National Institute for Trial Advocacy (U.S.)
-
Integration Or Separation?: A Strategy for Racial Equality
Roy L. Brooks
Integrated in principle, segregated in fact: is this the legacy of fifty years of progress" in American racial policy? Is there hope for much better? Roy L. Brooks, a distinguished professor of law and a writer on matters of race and civil rights, says with frank clarity what few will admit--integration hasn't worked and possibly never will. Equally, he casts doubt on the solution that many African-Americans and mainstream whites have advocated: total separation of the races. This book presents Brooks's strategy for a middle way between the increasingly unworkable extremes of integration and separation.< P>"
-
Against the Law
Paul F. Campos, Pierre Schlag, and Steven Douglas Smith
A fundamental critique of American law and legal thought, Against the Law consists of a series of essays written from three different perspectives that coalesce into a deep criticism of contemporary legal culture. Paul F. Campos, Pierre Schlag, and Steven D. Smith challenge the conventional representations of the legal system that are articulated and defended by American legal scholars. Unorthodox, irreverent, and provocative, Against the Law demonstrates that for many in the legal community, law has become a kind of substitute religion--an essentially idolatrous practice composed of systematic self-misrepresentation and self-deception.
Linked by a persistent inquiry into the nature and identity of "the law," these essays are informed by the conviction that the conventional representations of law, both in law schools and the courts, cannot be taken at face value--that the law, as commonly conceived, makes no sense. The authors argue that the relentlessly normative prescriptions of American legal thinkers are frequently futile and, indeed, often pernicious. They also argue that the failure to recognize the role that authorship must play in the production of legal thought plagues both the teaching and the practice of American law. Ranging from the institutional to the psychological and metaphysical deficiencies of the American legal system, the depth of criticism offered by Against the Law is unprecedented.
In a departure from the nearly universal legitimating and reformist tendencies of American legal thought, this book will be of interest not only to the legal academics under attack in the book, but also to sociologists, historians, and social theorists. More particularly, it will engage all the American lawyers who suspect that there is something very wrong with the nature and direction of their profession, law students who anticipate becoming part of that profession, and those readers concerned with the status of the American legal system.
-
Understanding Enterprise Liability: Rethinking Tort Reform for the Twenty-First Century
Virginia Nolan and Edmund Ursin
In recent years critics have assailed the cost, inefficiency, and unfairness of American tort law, including products liability and medical malpractice. Yet victims of accidental injury who look to the tort system for deserved compensation often find it a formidable obstacle. Those who seek to reform tort law find legislatures, particularly the United States Congress, paralyzed by the clash of powerful special interest groups.
Understanding Enterprise Liability sheds new light on the raging tort reform debate by challenging its fundamental assumptions. Offering historical insights and fresh perspectives on the politics and possibilities for sensible reform, Virginia Nolan and Edmund Ursin pragmatically assess alternative routes to a workable, balanced, and equitable system of compensation for personal injury. They offer a specific proposal, based on the precedent of strict products liability that incorporates the insights of no-fault compensation plan scholarship to create an enterprise liability doctrine that should appeal to courts and to tort reformers.
Printing is not supported at the primary Gallery Thumbnail page. Please first navigate to a specific Image before printing.