Описание: A controversial argument for reconsidering the limits of free speech
Swirling in the midst of the resurgence of neo-Nazi demonstrations, hate speech, and acts of domestic terrorism are uncomfortable questions about the limits of free speech. The United States stands apart from many other countries in that citizens have the power to say virtually anything without legal repercussions. But, in the case of white supremacy, does the First Amendment demand that we defend Nazis?
In Must We Defend Nazis?, legal experts Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic argue that it should not. Updated to consider the white supremacy demonstrations and counter-protests in Charlottesville and debates about hate speech on campus and on the internet, the book offers a concise argument against total, unchecked freedom of speech.
Delgado and Stefancic instead call for a system of free speech that takes into account the harms that hate speech can inflict upon disempowered, marginalized people. They examine the prevailing arguments against regulating speech, and show that they all have answers. They also show how limiting free speech would work in a legal framework and offer suggestions for activist lawyers and judges interested in approaching the hate speech controversy intelligently.
As citizens are confronting free speech in contention with equal dignity, access, and respect, Must We Defend Nazis? puts aside cliches that clutter First Amendment thinking, and presents a nuanced position that recognizes the needs of our increasingly diverse society.
Автор: Mcgarry Название: Intention, Supremacy and the Theories of Judicial Review ISBN: 1138856010 ISBN-13(EAN): 9781138856011 Издательство: Taylor&Francis Рейтинг: Цена: 22968.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание:
In the late 1980s, a vigorous debate began about how we may best justify, in constitutional terms, the English courts' jurisdiction to judicially review the exercise of public power derived from an Act of Parliament. Two rival theories emerged in this debate, the ultra vires theory and the common law theory. The debate between the supporters of these two theories has never satisfactorily been resolved and has been criticised as being futile. Yet, the debate raises some fundamental questions about the constitution of the United Kingdom, particularly: the relationship between Parliament and the courts; the nature of parliamentary supremacy in the contemporary constitution; and the possibility and validity of relying on legislative intent.
This book critically analyses the ultra vires and common law theories and argues that neither offers a convincing explanation for the courts' judicial review jurisdiction. Instead, the author puts forward the theory that parliamentary supremacy - and, in turn, the relationship between Parliament and the courts - is not absolute and does not operate in a hard and fast way but, rather, functions in a more flexible way and that the courts will balance particular Acts of Parliament against competing statutes or principles. McGarry argues that this new conception of parliamentary supremacy leads to an alternative theory of judicial review which significantly differs from both the ultra vires and common law theories.
This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of UK public law.
Автор: Fleming Crystal Marie Название: Resurrecting Slavery: Racial Legacies and White Supremacy in France ISBN: 1439914095 ISBN-13(EAN): 9781439914090 Издательство: Mare Nostrum (Eurospan) Рейтинг: Цена: 4383.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание:
How can politicians and ordinary citizens face the racial past in a country that frames itself as colorblind? In her timely and provocative book, Resurrecting Slavery, Crystal Fleming shows how people make sense of slavery in a nation where talking about race, colonialism, and slavery remains taboo. Noting how struggles over the meaning of racial history are informed by contemporary politics of race, she asks: What kinds of group identities are at stake today for activists and French people with ties to overseas territories where slavery took place?
Fleming investigates the connections and disconnections that are made between racism, slavery, and colonialism in France. She provides historical context and examines how politicians and commemorative activists interpret the racial past and present. Resurrecting Slavery also includes in-depth interviews with French Caribbean migrants outside the commemorative movement to address the everyday racial politics of remembrance.
Bringing a critical race perspective to the study of French racism, Fleming’s groundbreaking study provides a more nuanced understanding of race in France along with new ways of thinking about the global dimensions of slavery, anti-blackness, and white supremacy.
Автор: Carl Baudenbacher Название: The Fundamental Principles of EEA Law ISBN: 331945188X ISBN-13(EAN): 9783319451886 Издательство: Springer Рейтинг: Цена: 16769.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание: It focuses on the principles at the core of EEA law, some of which are common to EU and EEA law, while others have a specific place in EEA law and some ensure consistency between the EEA Agreement and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Автор: Gill-Pedro Название: EU Law, Fundamental Rights and National Democracy ISBN: 081538596X ISBN-13(EAN): 9780815385967 Издательство: Taylor&Francis Рейтинг: Цена: 22202.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание: The orthodox view is that rights complement democracy. This book critically examines this view in the context of EU fundamental rights, specifically in situations where EU law requires member states to respect EU fundamental rights.
Автор: Sloss David L Название: Death of Treaty Supremacy ISBN: 0199364028 ISBN-13(EAN): 9780199364022 Издательство: Oxford Academ Рейтинг: Цена: 11880.00 р. Наличие на складе: Есть у поставщика Поставка под заказ.
Описание: This book provides the first detailed history of the Constitution's treaty supremacy rule. It describes a process of invisible constitutional change. The traditional supremacy rule provided that all treaties supersede conflicting state laws; it precluded state governments from violating U.S. treaty obligations. Before 1945, treaty supremacy and self-execution were independent doctrines. Supremacy governed the relationship between treaties and state law. Self-execution governed the division of power over treaty implementation between Congress and the President. In 1945, the U.S. ratified the UN Charter, which obligates nations to promote human rights "for all without distinction as to race." In 1950, a California court applied the Charter's human rights provisions and the traditional treaty supremacy rule to invalidate a state law that discriminated against Japanese nationals. The implications were shocking: the decision implied that the United States had effectively abrogated Jim Crow laws throughout the South by ratifying the UN Charter. In response, conservatives mobilized support for a constitutional amendment, known as the Bricker Amendment, to abolish the treaty supremacy rule. The amendment never passed, but Bricker's supporters achieved their goals through de facto constitutional change. The de facto Bricker Amendment created a novel exception to the treaty supremacy rule for non-self-executing (NSE) treaties. The exception permits state governments to violate NSE treaties without authorization from the federal political branches. The death of treaty supremacy has significant implications for U.S. foreign policy and for U.S. compliance with its treaty obligations.
Описание: A controversial argument for reconsidering the limits of free speech
Swirling in the midst of the resurgence of neo-Nazi demonstrations, hate speech, and acts of domestic terrorism are uncomfortable questions about the limits of free speech. The United States stands apart from many other countries in that citizens have the power to say virtually anything without legal repercussions. But, in the case of white supremacy, does the First Amendment demand that we defend Nazis?
In Must We Defend Nazis?, legal experts Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic argue that it should not. Updated to consider the white supremacy demonstrations and counter-protests in Charlottesville and debates about hate speech on campus and on the internet, the book offers a concise argument against total, unchecked freedom of speech.
Delgado and Stefancic instead call for a system of free speech that takes into account the harms that hate speech can inflict upon disempowered, marginalized people. They examine the prevailing arguments against regulating speech, and show that they all have answers. They also show how limiting free speech would work in a legal framework and offer suggestions for activist lawyers and judges interested in approaching the hate speech controversy intelligently.
As citizens are confronting free speech in contention with equal dignity, access, and respect, Must We Defend Nazis? puts aside cliches that clutter First Amendment thinking, and presents a nuanced position that recognizes the needs of our increasingly diverse society.
ООО "Логосфера " Тел:+7(495) 980-12-10 www.logobook.ru
