Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

Lionized by the right and demonized by the left, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is the high court's quintessential conservative. Witty, outspoken, often abrasive, he is widely regarded as the most controversial member of the Court.

This book is the first comprehensive, reasoned, and sympathetic analysis of how Scalia has decided cases during his entire twenty-year Supreme Court tenure. Ralph Rossum focuses on Scalia's more than 600 Supreme Court opinions and dissents--carefully wrought, passionately argued, and filled with well-turned phrases--which portray him as an eloquent defender of an "original meaning" jurisprudence. He also includes analyses of Scalia's Court of Appeals opinions for the D.C. circuit, his major law review articles as a law professor and judge, and his provocative book, A Matter of Interpretation .

Rossum reveals Scalia's understanding of key issues confronting today's Court, such as the separation of powers, federalism, the free speech and press and religion clauses of the First Amendment, and the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. He suggests that Scalia displays such a keen interest in defending federalism that he sometimes departs from text and tradition, and reveals that he has disagreed with other justices most often in decisions involving the meaning of the First Amendment's establishment clause. He also analyzes Scalia's positions on the commerce clause and habeas corpus clause of Article I, the take care clause of Article II, the criminal procedural provisions of Amendments Four through Eight, protection of state sovereign immunity in the Eleventh Amendment, and Congress's enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The first book to fully articulate the contours of Scalia's constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence, Rossum's insightful study ultimately depicts Scalia as a principled, consistent, and intelligent textualist who is fearless and resolute, notwithstanding the controversy he often inspires.

Tabla de contenidos provista por Syndetics

• Preface(p. ix)
• 1 Introduction(p. 1)
• 2 "Text and Tradition": Scalia's Understanding of the Interpretive Enterprise(p. 27)
• 3 Constitutional Structure and Separation of Powers(p. 52)
• 4 Constitutional Structure and Federalism(p. 90)
• 5 Scalia's Textualism Applied to Substantive Rights(p. 127)
• 6 Scalia's Textualism Applied to Procedural Rights(p. 166)
• 7 The Impact of Scalia's Textualism on His Colleagues(p. 198)
• Appendix Cases in Which Justice Scalia Has Cited Dictionaries(p. 209)
• Notes(p. 213)
• Index(p. 281)

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

Library Journal Review

Rossum's latest book, accurately described by the publisher as a "sympathetic analysis" of Justice Scalia's jurisprudence, comes with the approach of the 20th anniversary of Scalia's appointment to the Supreme Court. Throughout his more than 600 opinions and dissents, Scalia has often been an outspoken member of the Supreme Court's conservative block. Rossum (American constitutionalism, Claremont McKenna Coll., CA; Federalism, the Supreme Court, and the Seventeenth Amendment: The Irony of Constitutional Democracy) probes the use and significance of textualism, a legal analytical approach that places primary emphasis on the verbiage and history of the document being interpreted, in Scalia's legal philosophy and judicial decisions. He addresses numerous cases relating to the separation of powers, federalism, substantive rights, and procedural rights. Rossum's presentation is slanted but still helpful in its exploration of the use of textualism by a key member of the Supreme Court. Recommended for law, academic, and large public libraries.-Theodore Pollack, New York Cty. Public Access Law Lib. (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.

CHOICE Review

This highly sympathetic view of the interpretive theories of Justice Scalia highlights the leading cases that emphasize his views. It is well edited and constructed. As Rossum (Claremont McKenna College) summarizes, Scalia believes in analysis of the original text of the Constitution and laws coming under Supreme Court scrutiny. When textual analysis fails, for any number of reasons, the judge relies on historical interpretation. All of this sounds reasonable and straightforward, if one believes that historical interpretation is a simple linear process devoid of political preference or ideology. Scalia's wit, eloquence, and biting sarcasm as to the opinions of his peers make him a colorful and interesting justice. There are, of course, alternative schemes of constitutional interpretation that seem, to many scholars, as coherent and intelligible as that of Scalia. Contending judicial philosophies get little ink in these pages. However, if one wants to know about Scalia and his thought, this is a fine volume suitable for students of constitutional thought and law. Summing Up: Highly recommended. Upper-division undergraduates, graduate students, researchers, faculty, and practitioners. E. Lewis New College of Florida