Foreshadows of the Law: Supreme Court Dissents and Constitutional Development

Cover
Greenwood Publishing Group, 1992 - 168 Seiten

The Supreme Court has final authority in determining what the Constitution means. The Court's findings have not, however, always been final. Lively focuses on several landmark dissenting opinions--resisted initially--later redefining the meaning of the Constitution. Each opinion arises from a rich historical context and involves constitutional issues of pointed significance. Vivid descriptions of some of the colorful personalities behind the opinions add appeal. Lively conveys the evolutionary and dynamic nature of the law demonstrating the relationship between present and past understanding of the Constitution. He describes the competitive nature of constitutional development and identifies the relevance of factors including subjective preference, values, vying theories, and ideologies.

The role of the Court, is addressed as are the federal government's relationship to the states and their citizens; slavery; property rights; substantive due process; freedom of speech; and the right to be left alone. This is a clearly presented and highly instructive consideration of how the Constitution's interpretation has been fashioned over time with important insights relevant to today's Court and contemporary cases.

Im Buch

Was andere dazu sagen - Rezension schreiben

Es wurden keine Rezensionen gefunden.

Ausgewählte Seiten

Inhalt

A Constitutional Right in Slavery
xxi
Images of a New Union
17
Constitutional Redefinition and National Reconstruction
35
The Rise Demise and Resurrection of Substantive Due Process
55
Color and the Constitution
79
Freedom of Speech The Indispensable Liberty
105
The Right to Be Let Alone
129
Afterword
153
Index
155
Urheberrecht

Andere Ausgaben - Alle anzeigen

Häufige Begriffe und Wortgruppen

Beliebte Passagen

Seite 118 - The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.
Seite 18 - ... so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.
Seite 102 - But in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.
Seite 59 - If, therefore, a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals, or the public safety has no roal or substantial relation to those objects, or is a palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to the constitution.
Seite 69 - This case is decided upon an economic theory which a large part of the country does not entertain. If it were a question whether I agreed with that theory, I should desire to study it further and long before making up my mind. But I do not conceive that to be my duty, because I strongly believe that...
Seite 64 - Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
Seite 107 - Nor need we enquire whether similar considerations enter into the review of statutes directed at particular religious ... or national ... or racial minorities . . . whether prejudice against discrete and insular minorities may be a special condition, which tends seriously to curtail the operation of those political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities, and which may call for a correspondingly more searching judicial inquiry.
Seite 58 - The theory of our governments, State and national, is opposed to the deposit of unlimited power anywhere. The executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches of these governments are all of limited and defined powers. There are limitations on such power which grow out of the essential nature of all free governments. Implied reservations of individual rights, without which the social compact could not exist, and which are respected by all governments entitled to the name.
Seite 153 - The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions, however, going back perhaps as far as Union Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford, the Court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution. In varying contexts the Court or individual Justices have indeed found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment...
Seite 103 - The destinies of the two races, in this country, are indissolubly linked together, and the interests of both require ^ that the common government of all shall not permit the seeds of race hate to be planted under the sanction of law.

Über den Autor (1992)

DONALD E. LIVELY is a Professor of Law at the University of Toledo College of Law. He is the author of Modern Communications Law (Praeger, 1991), Essential Principles of Communications Law (Praeger, 1991), and The Constitution and Race (Praeger, 1992).

Bibliografische Informationen