Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
80,150
result(s) for
"Government litigation"
Sort by:
Election administration in the United States : the state of reform after Bush v. Gore
\"This book tells the story of how the way in which we conduct elections has changed after the Florida recount litigation of 2000. Some of the nation's leading experts look at various aspects of election administration, including issues of ballot format, changes in registration procedures, the growth in the availability of absentee ballot rules and other forms of \"convenience voting,\" and changes in the technology used to record our votes. They also look at how the Bush v. Gore decision has been used by courts that monitor the election process and at the consequences of changes in practice for levels of invalid ballots, magnitude of racial disparities in voting, voter turnout, and access to the ballot by those living outside the United States. The editors, in their introduction, also consider the normative question of exactly what we want a voting system to do. An epilogue by two leading election law specialists looks at how election administration and election contest issues played out in the 2012 presidential election\"-- Provided by publisher.
BOOK
Law against the State
This collection of rich, empirically grounded case studies investigates the conditions and consequences of 'juridification' - the use of law by ordinary individuals as a form of protest against 'the state'. Starting from the actual practices of claimants, these case studies address the translation and interpretation of legal norms into local concepts, actions and practices in a way that highlights the social and cultural dynamism and multivocality of communities in their interaction with the law and legal norms. The contributors to this volume challenge the image of homogeneous and primordially norm-bound cultures that has been (unintentionally) perpetuated by some of the more prevalent treatments of law and culture. This volume highlights the heterogeneous geography of law and the ways boundaries between different legal bodies are transcended in struggles for rights. Contributions include case studies from South Africa, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Turkey, India, Papua New Guinea, Suriname, the Marshall Islands and Russia.
eBook
South Africa's High Treason Club : the white separatist Boeremag conspirators on trial
\"In the early 2000s, a few years after becoming a democracy, South Africa saw the rise of a white separatist militia known as the Boeremag. In the early 2000s, they devised a coup, and bombs started exploding across the country. This book chronicles the longest running criminal trial in South African history, piecing together court transcripts and interviews to explore the dynamics and ideals at the source of the movement and the coup. The book offers a firsthand look at the dark consequences of nationalism and populism\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Suing the tobacco and lead pigment industries
In Suing the Tobacco and Lead Pigment Industries, legal scholar Donald G. Gifford recounts the transformation of tort litigation in response to the challenge posed by victims of 21st-century public health crises who seek compensation from the product manufacturers. Class action litigation promised a strategy for documenting collective harm, but an increasingly conservative judicial and political climate limited this strategy. Then, in 1995, Mississippi attorney general Mike Moore initiated a parens patriae action on behalf of the state against cigarette manufacturers. Forty-five other states soon filed public product liability actions, seeking both compensation for the funds spent on public health crises and the regulation of harmful products. Gifford finds that courts, through their refusal to expand traditional tort claims, have resisted litigation as a solution to product-caused public health problems. Even if the government were to prevail, the remedy in such litigation is unlikely to be effective. Gifford warns, furthermore, that by shifting the powers to regulate products and to remediate public health problems from the legislature to the state attorney general, parens patriae litigation raises concerns about the appropriate allocation of powers among the branches of government.
eBook
Executive (Agency) Administration
The current account of executive power is incomplete. Before joining the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan noted that the President seeks control over the executive branch. Kagan referred to this paradigm as “presidential administration.” Kagan’s work and the significant body of literature it spawned have also acknowledged, however, that independent agencies are generally outside the ambit of presidential power. Nonetheless, this scholarship has not looked beyond the White House to consider other forms of overarching executive influence on the administrative state.
This Article reveals that not only the President but also executive agencies seek and wield control over independent agencies for reasons that are distinct from the President’s interests. This results in what this Article calls “executive administration.” More specifically, executive agencies exert influence via litigation brought on their behalf by the Department of Justice against independent agencies before Article III courts. This contention is supported by an original dataset of approximately 120 cases spanning the mid-twentieth century through mid-2018.
Litigation has consistently furthered the interests of executive agencies, including their desire to limit independent agencies’ power to regulate them and in overlapping areas of policymaking authority. For instance, courts have reversed independent agency decisions binding executive agencies and have constrained independent agencies’ authority to implement their enabling statutes. This may be for the better, but may also be for the worse. On the one hand, litigation offers a meaningful vehicle for beneficial, ex post executive oversight of independent agencies, particularly in light of the dearth of presidential mechanisms of quality control. On the other hand, a recent Supreme Court decision suggests litigation may be used to walk back Chevron deference to independent agencies—to the detriment of their ability to enforce the law with nonpartisanship and expertise.
Finally, recent cases brought by the Trump Administration have sought to dislocate independent agencies in pursuit of a more unitary executive branch. These cases suggest that litigation could be a tool of presidential administration as well. Theoretically, this litigation exemplifies a constitutional prophylactic: In order to intensify control over the administrative state, the executive branch must cede power to the judiciary. However, courts will continue to serve as barriers to presidential abuse only as long as they remain nonpartisan.
Journal Article
The Italian Constitutional Court and recentralization along the pendulum of regionalism
This paper employs a quantitative analysis of the disputes between central and regional government concerning the role of the Italian Constitutional Court, focusing on the context of decentralization initiated during the late 1990s. The econometric evidence demonstrates a significant decrease in favourable outcomes for regional governments following the process of recentralization, which was commenced by central government in 2011 in response to a major financial crisis. The results of this study support the perspective of a centralistic attitude of the courts in litigation concerning subnational governments and provide fresh insights into the role of the courts in the relationship between recentralization and major economic crises.
Journal Article