Showing titles in Judicial Systems

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 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.

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.

An incisive biography of the Supreme Court's enigmatic Chief Justice, taking us inside the momentous legal decisions of his tenure so far. John Roberts was named to the Supreme Court in 2005 claiming he would act as a neutral umpire in deciding cases. His critics argue he has been anything but...

The Supreme Court's rulings have shaped American life and justice and allowed Americans to retain basic freedoms such as privacy, free speech, and the right to a fair trial. This revised and updated edition of Michael G. Trachtman's riveting work includes 10 important cases from 2010 to 2015.

Our ability to make choices is fundamental to our sense of ourselves as human beings and essential to the political values of freedom-protecting nations. Whom we love; where we work; how we spend our time; what we buy: such choices define us in the eyes of ourselves and others, and much blood and ink has been spilt to establish and protect our rights to make them freely. Choice can also be a burden. Our cognitive capacity to research and make the best decisions is limited, so every active choice comes at a cost.

Since America's founding, the US Supreme Court had issued a vast number of decisions on a staggeringly wide variety of subjects. And hundreds of judges have occupied the bench. Yet as Cass R. Sunstein, the eminent legal scholar and best-selling co-author of Nudge, points out, almost every one of the Justices fits into a very small number of types regardless of ideology: the hero, the soldier, the minimalist, and the mute.

One promise of democracy is the right of every citizen to vote. And yet, from our founding, strong political forces were determined to limit that right. The Supreme Court, Alexander Hamilton wrote, would protect the weak against this very sort of tyranny. Still, as On Account of Race forcefully demonstrates, through the better part of American history the Court has instead been a protector of white rule. And complex threats against the right to vote persist even today.

From 2011, when Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives, until the present, Congress enacted hardly any major legislation outside of the tax law President Trump signed in 2017. In the same period, the Supreme Court dismantled much of America's campaign finance law, severely...

A behind-the-scenes look at the powerful courts that decide when international trade is legal or not. Does their rise mark a huge boon for corporations to challenge the power of sovereign nation-states? International trade deals have become vastly complex documents, seeking to govern everything...

The Indian Penal Code was formulated in 1860, three years after the first Indian revolt for independence. It was the country's first-ever codification of offences and penalties. But it was only in 1870 that Section 124A was slipped into Chapter VI ('Of Offences against the State'), defining the...

For the first time, a collection of dissents from the most famous Supreme Court cases If American history can truly be traced through the majority decisions in landmark Supreme Court cases, then what about the dissenting opinions? In issues of race, gender, privacy, workers' rights, and more...