Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

"The work stands alone not only for its thesis but for its full length treatment of the due process clause... it should be required reading for all students of the constitution, on and off the bench." -- CHOICE Magazine

"[A] seminal work which should be read by every Supreme Court Justice... this volume surely deserves an honored position among the legal histories devoted to tracing the development of decisional process." -- The Urban Lawyer

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

CHOICE Review

Strong (North Carolina) is well-known constitutional scholar whose career has spanned half a century of legal thought. He argues that due process has always embraced two substantive cores: opposition to expropriation of property and to monopoly in economic enterprise. He further argues that the received wisdom of such eminent constitutional scholars as Gerald Gunther and Walton Hamilton, who assert a ``smooth progression from the Slaughterhouse Cases to Lochner,'' are in ``grievous error.'' The aversion to Lochner by scholars and the Supreme Court has spilled over into an aversion to any notion of due process that has substantive economic content. This aversion has not only distorted history and made bad constitutional law, but has deprived us of a significant component of protection for property rights and against public and private monopoly- both important to constitutionalism. Strong reanalyzes the most significant due process cases in a book that should be required reading for all students of the Constitution, on and off the bench. The work stands alone both for its thesis and its full-length treatment of the due process clause. No bibliography; copious footnotes; index of cases. For upper-division and graduate students.-P.J. Galie, Canisius College