Kód: 02031373
Although the concept of precedent is basic to the operation of the legal system, there has not yet been a full-length empirical study of why US Supreme Court justices have chosen to alter precedent. This book attempts to fill this ... celý popis
3775 Kč
Potřebujete více kusů?Máte-li zájem o více kusů, prověřte, prosím, nejprve dostupnost titulu na naši zákaznické podpoře.
Nákupem získáte 378 bodů
Although the concept of precedent is basic to the operation of the legal system, there has not yet been a full-length empirical study of why US Supreme Court justices have chosen to alter precedent. This book attempts to fill this gap by analyzing those decisions of the Vinson, Warren, and Burgers courts, as well as the first six terms of the Rehnquist Court - a span of 47 years (1946–1992) - which formally altered precedent. The authors summarize previous studies of precedent and the Court, assess the conference voting of justices, and compile a list of overruling and overruled cases. Additionally, the authors draw a distinction between personal and instituional stare decisis. By using the attitudinal model of Supreme Court decision making, the authors find that it is the individual justices' ideologies which explain their voting behavior.
Zařazení knihy Knihy v angličtině Society & social sciences Politics & government Political structure & processes
3775 Kč
Osobní odběr Praha, Brno a 12903 dalších
Copyright ©2008-24 nejlevnejsi-knihy.cz Všechna práva vyhrazenaSoukromíCookies
Nákupní košík ( prázdný )