Explore the vast range of titles available.

In an original assessment of all three branches, Jasmine Farrier reveals a new way in which the American federal system is broken. Turning away from the partisan narratives of everyday politics,Constitutional Dysfunction on Trial diagnoses the deeper and bipartisan nature of imbalance of power that undermines public deliberation and accountability, especially on war powers. By focusing on the lawsuits brought by Congressional members that challenge presidential unilateralism, Farrier provides a new diagnostic lens on the permanent institutional problems that have undermined the separation of powers system in the last five decades, across a diverse array of partisan and policy landscapes. As each chapter demonstrates, member lawsuits are an outlet for frustrated members of both parties who cannot get their House and Senate colleagues to confront overweening presidential action through normal legislative processes. But these lawsuits often backfire - leaving Congress as an institution even more disadvantaged. Jasmine Farrier argues these suits are more symptoms of constitutional dysfunction than the cure.Constitutional Dysfunction on Trial shows federal judges will not and cannot restore the separation of powers system alone. Fifty years of congressional atrophy cannot be reversed in court.

Pradeep Chhibber and Ken Kollman rely on historical data spanning back to the eighteenth century from Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States to revise our understanding of why a country's party system consists of national or regional parties. They demonstrate that the party systems in these four countries have been shaped by the authority granted to different levels of government. Departing from the conventional focus on social divisions or electoral rules in determining whether a party system will consist of national or regional parties, they argue instead that national party systems emerge when economic and political power resides with the national government. Regional parties thrive when authority in a nation-state rests with provincial or state governments. The success of political parties therefore depends on which level of government voters credit for policy outcomes. National political parties win votes during periods when political and economic authority rests with the national government, and lose votes to regional and provincial parties when political or economic authority gravitates to lower levels of government. This is the first book to establish a link between federalism and the formation of national or regional party systems in a comparative context. It places contemporary party politics in the four examined countries in historical and comparative perspectives, and provides a compelling account of long-term changes in these countries. For example, the authors discover a surprising level of voting for minor parties in the United States before the 1930s. This calls into question the widespread notion that the United States has always had a two-party system. In fact, only recently has the two-party system become predominant.

The U.S. Constitution found in school textbooks and under glass in Washington is not the one enforced today by the Supreme Court. InRestoring the Lost Constitution, Randy Barnett argues that since the nation's founding, but especially since the 1930s, the courts have been cutting holes in the original Constitution and its amendments to eliminate the parts that protect liberty from the power of government. From the Commerce Clause, to the Necessary and Proper Clause, to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court has rendered each of these provisions toothless. In the process, the written Constitution has been lost. Barnett establishes the original meaning of these lost clauses and offers a practical way to restore them to their central role in constraining government: adopting a \"presumption of liberty\" to give the benefit of the doubt to citizens when laws restrict their rightful exercises of liberty. He also provides a new, realistic and philosophically rigorous theory of constitutional legitimacy that justifies both interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning and, where that meaning is vague or open-ended, construing it so as to better protect the rights retained by the people. As clearly argued as it is insightful and provocative,Restoring the Lost Constitutionforcefully disputes the conventional wisdom, posing a powerful challenge to which others must now respond. This updated edition features an afterword with further reflections on individual popular sovereignty, originalist interpretation, judicial engagement, and the gravitational force that original meaning has exerted on the Supreme Court in several recent cases.

How do Supreme Court justices decide their cases? Do they follow their policy preferences? Or are they constrained by the law and by other political actors? The Constrained Court combines new theoretical insights and extensive data analysis to show that law and politics together shape the behavior of justices on the Supreme Court. Michael Bailey and Forrest Maltzman show how two types of constraints have influenced the decision making of the modern Court. First, Bailey and Maltzman document that important legal doctrines, such as respect for precedents, have influenced every justice since 1950. The authors find considerable variation in how these doctrines affect each justice, variation due in part to the differing experiences justices have brought to the bench. Second, Bailey and Maltzman show that justices are constrained by political factors. Justices are not isolated from what happens in the legislative and executive branches, and instead respond in predictable ways to changes in the preferences of Congress and the president. The Constrained Court shatters the myth that justices are unconstrained actors who pursue their personal policy preferences at all costs. By showing how law and politics interact in the construction of American law, this book sheds new light on the unique role that the Supreme Court plays in the constitutional order.

According to Niccolo Machiavelli, leaders must always be prepared for unexpected change, sometimes rapidly and in violent and dramatic forms, in order to retain control of their fate. Philip Abbott applies this insight to U. S. presidents. He identifies six major periods of change in the political economic and international sphere and examines how presidents from Washington to Obama responded to new challenges. How presidents are elected, how they are expected to govern, how the economy functions, and what place the nation holds in the international system create general rules that presidents must acknowledge until an alteration in one or more of these patterns changes. The author maintains that, in the American presidency, the difference between success and failure rests with how effectively a president reacts to the changes within these systems during his term in office. Organized chronologically, this text focuses on high risk decisions presidents have made from George Washington's issuance of the Neutrality Proclamation to Obama's promotion of health care legislation. This edition includes new material on the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama as well as updated bibliographical entries. The Challenge of the American Presidency will be of interest to those who teach courses in political science, history and American Studies as well as to the those who are interested in assessing and comparing U. S. presidents.

The application of the Political Question Doctrine is at a crucial crossroads as the Supreme Court continues to test new \"War on Terrorism\" initiatives. Historically, the political question doctrine has held the courts from resolving constitutional issues that are better left to other departments of government, as a way of maintaining the system of checks and balances. However, the doctrine's many ambiguities have allowed a roughly defined juxtaposition of the branches of government during previous years when the Republic was concerned with both international matters and those within its continental confines. The Political Question Doctrine and the Supreme Court of the United States discusses the gradual changes in the parameters of the doctrine, including its current position dealing with increasingly extraterritorial concerns. Nada Mourtada-Sabbah and Bruce E. Cain bring together critical essays that examine the broad issues of judicial involvement in politics and the future of the doctrine. With a wide range of historical and theoretical perspectives, this book will stimulate debate among those interested in political science and legal studies.

Each citizen in America lives under two Constitutions - the United States, federal Constitution which applies to all citizens, and the constitution of the state in which the citizen lives. Often overlooked and basically unknown, the state constitutions play a vital role in governance and preserving our unalienable rights. Perhaps the best way to understand each constitution is to compare and contrast them. Accordingly, as a case study, this article examines the age, length, predecessors, drafting process, conventions, ratification process, and amendment procedures of the State of Michigan Constitution of 1963 and the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, this article examines how each of these constitutions addresses the separation of powers, legislature, executive, judiciary, local government, transportation, education, finance, taxation, and the protection of unalienable rights. Armed with this understanding, we will be better informed citizens, and more ably equipped to participate in self-governance and protect the unalienable rights of the citizenry.

Richard Nixon considered establishing a strong peacetime economy one of his most important political objectives, [not least for] distinguishing himself from the cautious policies of President Dwight Eisenhower. Using Richard Neustadt's analytical framework of presidential power, Nigel Bowles develops five case studies around President Nixon's economic policies. The thoughtful, insightful analysis goes far to help us understand the sources of Richard Nixon's authority and power, and his use of both. For each of the \"issue-stories\" (as Bowles terms them), he considers the president's bargaining advantages: his authority (constitutional and statutory), popular prestige, and personal qualities. He then answers Neustadt's twin questions: \"What was the president's inheritance?\" and \"What was his legacy?\" Bowles's chosen cases represent fiscal policy, wage and price policy, international monetary policy, and domestic monetary policy. Through these analyses, Bowles offers new perspectives on Nixon's use of authority and power; his dealings with and views of senior politicians and power-brokers; his ruthlessness and political ingenuity; the ways his experiences as congressman, senator, and vice president shaped his approach to the presidency; and his subordination of other objectives to his drive for re-election in 1972. He concludes that Nixon used the limited authority he had under the separation of powers to the fullest degree, often thereby augmenting his power in the short-term, but undermining it in the longer-term. Nixon's Businessis the first book to make systematic use of Neustadt's crucial framework in understanding a specific presidency; the first to analyze empirically the components of Nixon's authority and power; and the first to demonstrate the implications of both for understanding the institution of the United States presidency.