By Robert J. Hume
In Courthouse Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage within the States, Robert J. Hume examines how the democratization of nation courts and country constitutional platforms has prompted the means of judges to guard minority rights. via a radical exam of same-sex marriage coverage, Hume exhibits that democratic ideas like judicial elections and initiative modification strategies have conditioned the effect of judges on country marriage legislation. utilizing a mixture of unique and publicly to be had information, Hume demonstrates that "courthouse democracy" has motivated the habit of kingdom judges, the reactions of the general public to country courtroom judgements, and the long term coverage outcomes of those judgements, together with the passage of nation constitutional amendments. Hume concludes that judges should be in a position to generating significant social change-and conserving minority rights-only once they have the institutional assets that they should stand opposed to renowned opinion.
Read Online or Download Courthouse Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage in the States PDF
Similar civil rights books
Describes landmark loose speech judgements of the excellent court docket whereas highlighting the problems of language, rhetoric, and conversation that underlie them. on the intersection of conversation and primary modification legislation dwell major questions: what's the speech we should shield, and why may still we defend it?
Regardless of common admiration for the 1st Amendment's safeguard of speech, this iconic characteristic of yankee felony notion hasn't ever been thoroughly theorized. present theories of speech continue at the foundation of criminal doctrine and judicial decisionmaking, social and political philosophy, or felony and highbrow historical past.
This assortment engages with a valuable topic on european citizenship - the emancipation of definite electorate, the alienation of others - and expands the horizons to interrogate no matter if related debates and developments could be pointed out in different fields of eu integration. the point of interest of the booklet is incredibly citizen-focused.
This e-book is an anthology of labor via serious media students, media makers, and activists who're dedicated to advancing social justice. subject matters addressed comprise yet should not restricted to foreign media activist initiatives equivalent to the ideal to verbal exchange circulate and its corollaries; the significance of listening and enacting regulations that strengthen democratic media; neighborhood and native media justice tasks; explorations of the demanding situations the period of participatory media pose to public media; formative years and minority media tasks and activism; moral dilemmas posed via makes an attempt to democratize entry to media instruments; the ongoing marginalization of feminist views in foreign coverage venues; software program freedom and highbrow estate rights; video activism in either historic and modern contexts; net options for protecting dissenting voices; and 5 debts by way of well known scholar/activists in their lifelong struggles for media justice.
- Faithful and Fearless
- Conjugality: Marriage and Marriage-like Relationships before the Law
- Legal Inversions: Lesbians, Gay Men, and the Politics of the Law
- To Write in the Light of Freedom: The Newspapers of the 1964 Mississippi Freedom Schools
Additional info for Courthouse Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage in the States
Pol. Sci. 599 (1995). Introduction 20 On issues such as same-sex marriage, the public is likely to pressure elected officials to defy or evade unpopular court decisions. In systems with direct democracy, citizens can take action against the decisions themselves. It seems reasonable to expect public reactions to state court decisions to be shaped by institutional conditions. We know from research on state public opinion that citizens have attitudes about state courts and that institutional design choices affect these attitudes.
Q. 633 (1998); Walter F. Murphy & Joseph Tanenhaus, Public Opinion and the United States Supreme Court, 2 Law & Soc’y Rev. 357 (1968). 36 Data are from the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, based on a national internet survey of 32,800 adults. For more information on the survey see Chapter 6. 36 Introduction enjoys such high approval ratings partly because the public holds mythic views of the Supreme Court, perceiving the justices as principled interpreters of the Constitution and defenders of rights.
17 Article III of the Constitution does not specify the size of the Supreme Court, and over time the number of justices has varied, from as few as six in 1789 to as many as ten in 1863. Perhaps the most famous controversy concerning the size of the Supreme Court occurred during the 1930s, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed adding up to six new justices to the Supreme Court for every justice who was over the age of seventy. Congress also has the power to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the Exceptions Clause of Article III, section 2, as interpreted by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v.