Casos legales históricos y la sociedad estadounidense Serie

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1868, sought to protect the rights of the newly freed slaves; but its first important test - centered on a vitriolic dispute among the white butchers of mid-Reconstruction New Orleans - did not arise until five years later. This is a guide to one of the US Supreme Court's most famous cases.

The book explores the Supreme Court's 1997 rulings against a constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, delving into the tension between individual liberty and the emotional weight of human suffering. It examines the implications of these decisions on personal autonomy and societal values, highlighting the complex ethical landscape surrounding end-of-life choices. Through this analysis, it engages with the broader conversation about the role of government in personal matters of life and death.

In the late 1970s, Skokie, a Chicago suburb, was home to many Jewish Holocaust survivors. Their hope for a peaceful life was threatened when a neo-Nazi group announced plans for a parade in 1977. Philippa Strum's retelling of these events reveals the intense controversy surrounding the case and its implications for First Amendment rights. The clash was stark: American Nazis asserted their free speech rights, while the Jewish community sought to live without intimidation. Skokie officials argued that the march would provoke violence and secured a court injunction against it. In response, the ACLU defended the Nazis' right to free speech, leading to a complex legal battle. Strum details the perspectives of key figures: Frank Collin, leader of the National Socialist Party and son of a Jewish survivor; Sol Goldstein, a Holocaust survivor organizing a counter-protest; Skokie mayor Albert Smith, focused on community safety; and ACLU attorney David Goldberger, a Jewish man defending the Nazis. Although the ACLU won, it faced backlash, losing 30,000 members, and the Nazis ultimately never marched. Strum's compelling narrative underscores the necessity of defending free speech, even for those deemed objectionable, and prompts reflection on the constitutional and moral dimensions of free speech, particularly in today's debates over hate speech on college campuses.

Relates the story behind Marbury v Madison and explains why it is a foundational case for understanding the US Supreme Court. Nelson reveals how John Marshall deftly avoided a dangerous political confrontation between the executive and judicial branches by upholding the rule of law, and how he... číst celé

"Although huge in scope and impact, the 9/11 attacks were not the first threat by foreign terrorists on American soil. During World War II, eight Germans landed on our shores in 1942 bent on sabotage. Caught before they could carry out their missions, under FDR's presidential proclamation they were hauled before a secret military tribunal and found guilty. Meeting in an emergency session, the Supreme Court upheld the tribunal's authority. Justice was swift: six of the men were put to death - a sentence much more harsh than would have been allowed in a civil trial." "Louis Fisher chronicles the capture, trial, and punishment of the Nazi saboteurs in order to examine the extent to which procedural rights are suspended in time of war. One of America's leading constitutional scholars, Fisher analyzes the political, legal, and administrative context of the Supreme Court decision Ex parte Quirin (1942). He reconstructs a rush to judgment that has striking relevance to current events by considering the reach of the law in trials conducted against wartime enemies."--Jacket.

The military trial of William Calley for his role in the slaughter of 500 or more Vietnamese civilians at My Lai shocked a nation already sharply divided over a controversial war. This work is a retelling of the My Lai story through the prism of the law. číst celé