Madison V. Marshall: Popular Sovereignty, Natural Law, and the United States Constitution

Capa
Lexington Books, 2002 - 208 páginas
Popular Sovereignty or Natural Law? At a time of constitutional crisis in the American body politic, Guy Padula's timely and stimulating new work explores whether the answers to today's heated political debate can be found by scrutinizing the past. In Madison v. Marshall Padula turns the spotlight on the interpretive intent of America's Founding Fathers to discover if the consent of the people or the rule of justice triumphs. Comparing the constitutional theories of the Founding generation's two preeminent constitutional authorities, Padula shatters the Originalist myth that Madison and Marshall shared a compatible constitutional jurisprudence. He concludes that the meaning of the Constitution has been contested from the outset. This is essential reading for legal scholars, political scientists and historians seeking to learn more about the fundamental nature of U.S. law and how it should be interpreted.
 

O que estão dizendo - Escrever uma resenha

Não encontramos nenhuma resenha nos lugares comuns.

Conteúdo

Introduction
1
All Countries Have Some Form of Government
3
The Poisonous Tendency of Precedents of Usurpation
23
We the People An Assembly of Demigods
43
Colonel H Deserted Me
65
I Believe I Must Nominate You
105
Never Give Him an Affirmative Answer
125
We Start with First Principles
157
The Mystery of Things
171
Selected Bibliography
181
Index
195
About the Author
Direitos autorais

Outras edições - Visualizar todos

Termos e frases comuns

Sobre o autor (2002)

Guy Padula received his Ph.D. from The City University of New York. He is currently attending Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law.

Informações bibliográficas