Leseprobe
* Affiliatelinks/Werbelinks
Links auf reinlesen.de sind sogenannte Affiliate-Links. Wenn du auf so einen Affiliate-Link klickst und über diesen Link einkaufst, bekommt reinlesen.de von dem betreffenden Online-Shop oder Anbieter eine Provision. Für dich verändert sich der Preis nicht.
Political Questions Judicial Answers
Thomas M. Franck
* Affiliatelinks/Werbelinks
Links auf reinlesen.de sind sogenannte Affiliate-Links. Wenn du auf so einen Affiliate-Link klickst und über diesen Link einkaufst, bekommt reinlesen.de von dem betreffenden Online-Shop oder Anbieter eine Provision. Für dich verändert sich der Preis nicht.
Ratgeber / Recht, Beruf, Finanzen
Beschreibung
Almost since the beginning of the republic, America's rigorous separation of powers among Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches has been umpired by the federal judiciary. It may seem surprising, then, that many otherwise ordinary cases are not decided in court even when they include allegations that the President, or Congress, has violated a law or the Constitution itself. Most of these orphan cases are shunned by the judiciary simply because they have foreign policy aspects. In refusing to address the issues involved, judges indicate that judicial review, like politics, should stop at the water's edge--and foreign policy managers find it convenient to agree! Thomas Franck, however, maintains that when courts invoke the "political question" doctrine to justify such reticence, they evade a constitutional duty. In his view, whether the government has acted constitutionally in sending men and women to die in foreign battles is just as appropriate an issue for a court to decide as whether property has been taken without due process. In this revisionist work, Franck proposes ways to subject the conduct of foreign policy to the rule of law without compromising either judicial integrity or the national interest. By examining the historical origins of the separation of powers in the American constitutional tradition, with comparative reference to the practices of judiciaries in other federal systems, he broadens and enriches discussions of an important national issue that has particular significance for critical debate about the "imperial presidency."
Kundenbewertungen
Declaratory judgment, Baker v. Carr, Summary judgment, Jurisdiction, Federal Constitutional Court, In camera, Federal judge, Precedent, Procedural law, War Powers Resolution, National security, Question of law, Plaintiff, Consideration, Jurisprudence, Adjudication, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marbury v. Madison, Subpoena, Public international law, Discretion, Freedom of speech, Treaty, Evidence (law), International law, Sovereign immunity, Act of state doctrine, Sovereignty, Defendant, Foreign policy, Rule of law, Reid v. Covert, Classified information, Ambiguity (law), Legislation, Legal proceeding, Constitutionality, Judicial interpretation, Federal republic, Common law, Deem (law), Judiciary, Prosecutor, Objection (law), Political question, Basic law, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Judicial restraint, Separation of powers, International court, Judicial deference, Constitutionalism, Statute, Affidavit, United States federal judge, Petitioner, Presumption, Judicial activism, Legal process (jurisprudence), United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Judicial independence, Abdication, Standing (law), Finality (law), United States v. Lee, Injunction, Legal burden of proof, Court order, Extradition, Foreign relations