Cite This        Tampung        Export Record
Judul Intelligible Constitution : The Supreme Court's Obligation To Maintain The Constitution As Something We The People Can Understand / Joseph Goldstein
Pengarang Goldstein, Joseph
Penerbitan New York : Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, 1992
Deskripsi Fisik xx, 201 hal.; 21,5 cm ;21,5 cm
ISBN 979 - 25 - 7570 - 7*
Subjek United States-Supreme Court
United States-Constitutional Law-interpretation and construction
Judicial opinions
Abstrak In the Intelligible constitution, Goldstein makes a compelling argument that, in a democracy based upon informed consent, the SUpreme Court has an obligation to communicate clearly and candidly to We the People when it interprets the Constitution. After a fascinating discussion of the language of the Constitution and Supreme Court opinions (including the analysis of Webster), he present a series of opinion studies in important cases, focusing not thought and expression. Using the two Brown v. Board of Education cases, Cooper v. Aaron, Regents of the University of Californiav. Bakke, and others as his examples, Goldstein demonstrates the pitfalls to which the Court has succumbed in the past: Writing deliberately ambiguos decisions to win the votes of colleagues, challenging each others opinon in private but not in public, and not speaking honeslty when the writer knows a concurring Justice misunderstands the opinion which he or she is supporting. Even some landmark decisions, he writes, have featured seriously flawed opinions-preventing We the People from understanding why the justice reasoned as they did, and why they disagreed with each other. He goes on to suggest five "cannons of comprehensibility" for Supreme Court opinios, to ensure that the justice explain themselves clearly, honstly, and unambigously, so that all the various opinios in each case would constitute a comprehensible message about their accord and discord in interpreting the Constitution. Both a fascinating look how the Court shapes oits opinions and a clarion call to action, this book provides an important addition to our understanding of how to maintain the Constitution as a living document, by and for the People, in its third century.
Catatan Indeks : p. 195-201
Bahasa Indonesia
Bentuk Karya Tidak ada kode yang sesuai
Target Pembaca Tidak ada kode yang sesuai

 
No Barcode No. Panggil Akses Lokasi Ketersediaan
00000016600 347.30735 GOL i Dapat dipinjam Perpustakaan Lantai 3 - Mahkamah Konstitusi RI Tersedia
pesan
Tag Ind1 Ind2 Isi
001 INLIS000000000007591
005 20221109084541
008 221109################|##########|#ind##
020 # # $a 979 - 25 - 7570 - 7*
035 # # $a 0010-0520007591
041 $a ind
082 # # $a 347.30735
084 # # $a 347.30735 GOL i
100 0 # $a Goldstein, Joseph
245 1 4 $a Intelligible Constitution : $b The Supreme Court's Obligation To Maintain The Constitution As Something We The People Can Understand /$c Joseph Goldstein
260 # # $a New York :$b Konrad Adenauer Stiftung,$c 1992
300 # # $a xx, 201 hal.; 21,5 cm ; $c 21,5 cm
500 # # $a Indeks : p. 195-201
520 # # $a In the Intelligible constitution, Goldstein makes a compelling argument that, in a democracy based upon informed consent, the SUpreme Court has an obligation to communicate clearly and candidly to We the People when it interprets the Constitution. After a fascinating discussion of the language of the Constitution and Supreme Court opinions (including the analysis of Webster), he present a series of opinion studies in important cases, focusing not thought and expression. Using the two Brown v. Board of Education cases, Cooper v. Aaron, Regents of the University of Californiav. Bakke, and others as his examples, Goldstein demonstrates the pitfalls to which the Court has succumbed in the past: Writing deliberately ambiguos decisions to win the votes of colleagues, challenging each others opinon in private but not in public, and not speaking honeslty when the writer knows a concurring Justice misunderstands the opinion which he or she is supporting. Even some landmark decisions, he writes, have featured seriously flawed opinions-preventing We the People from understanding why the justice reasoned as they did, and why they disagreed with each other. He goes on to suggest five "cannons of comprehensibility" for Supreme Court opinios, to ensure that the justice explain themselves clearly, honstly, and unambigously, so that all the various opinios in each case would constitute a comprehensible message about their accord and discord in interpreting the Constitution. Both a fascinating look how the Court shapes oits opinions and a clarion call to action, this book provides an important addition to our understanding of how to maintain the Constitution as a living document, by and for the People, in its third century.
650 4 $a Judicial opinions
650 4 $a United States-Constitutional Law-interpretation and construction
650 4 $a United States-Supreme Court
990 # # $a 16600/MKRI-P/VI-2010
990 # # $a 16600/MKRI-P/VI-2010
Content Unduh katalog