The Constitution Under Siege is a provocative teaching instrument that uses law, history, and politics to test what the law arguably "is" against assertions of what it "ought" to be. It examines the questionable impulses of presidents, members of Congress, the military, and intelligence agencies to bend or break the Constitution and the laws. In questioning the legitimacy of raw assertions of unaccountable power, the editors reject both the illustrative case approach of political scientists and precedent-driven approach of lawyers, supplementing key court cases with historically-rich essays, notes, and questions. These essays explain where our nation's "first principles" came from, and why they became imbedded, at least until recently, in our laws and institutions. Above all, these materials will prompt the reader to ask how, and by what authority, presidents, Congress, and even courts have come to allow the military and secret agencies to kidnap, torture, assassinate, or secretly detain citizens or aliens, and to use military and para-military force without running afoul of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. "This superb book, written by two of the nation's most acute analysts of law and politics, provides readers with materials indispensable to an understanding of the many dubious assertions of governmental power, by both presidents and Congress, that have rocked the foundations of our republic. ... It is must reading for all those concerned about the future of constitutional government." -- David Gray Adler, James McClure Professor of Public Policy at the University of Idaho "The Constitution Under Siege offers unparalleled insights arising from the authors' singular mastery of documents, events, and law. From the Barbary pirates to Islamic terrorism, no single source more definitively instructs the reader as it interweaves American law and policy abroad. This is an indispensable book." -- Robert J. Spitzer, Distinguished Service Professor, SUNY, Cortland

The Internet gives us information, communication options, shopping opportunities, entertainment, and much more—all at the touch of a fingertip and much of it for free. But in exchange for these benefits, we may be losing a basic right: the right to privacy. By clicking to accept website user agreements, we often allow companies to track our activities online and to share our data with outside groups. In addition, the police and government agencies can also track people online—and this tracking is sometimes done secretly, without user agreements or search warrants. Privacy laws and the US Constitution are supposed to protect privacy in the United States, as are laws and conventions in other parts of the world. But judicial and legal systems have not kept pace with technology. And until laws catch up, users enter a legal gray area when they communicate digitally—an arena in which their most private conversations might not be protected from intrusion. Such intrusion can be dangerous: government agencies can use information obtained via digital spying to harass, arrest, or imprison citizens. Other groups can use private digital data to discriminate in banking, housing, and other businesses. Around the world, critics are sounding the alarm about digital privacy. Many have called for stricter controls on data tracking. What rights do you have when it comes to privacy online? How can you be a smart cyber citizen and protect your personal digital data? These questions are at the heart of the Internet privacy debate.

Two months after the attacks of 9/11, the Bush administration, in the midst of what it perceived to be a state of emergency, authorized the indefinite detention of noncitizens suspected of terrorist activities and their subsequent trials by a military commission. Here, distinguished Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben uses such circumstances to argue that this unusual extension of power, or "state of exception," has historically been an underexamined and powerful strategy that has the potential to transform democracies into totalitarian states. The sequel to Agamben's Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, State of Exception is the first book to theorize the state of exception in historical and philosophical context. In Agamben's view, the majority of legal scholars and policymakers in Europe as well as the United States have wrongly rejected the necessity of such a theory, claiming instead that the state of exception is a pragmatic question. Agamben argues here that the state of exception, which was meant to be a provisional measure, became in the course of the twentieth century a normal paradigm of government. Writing nothing less than the history of the state of exception in its various national contexts throughout Western Europe and the United States, Agamben uses the work of Carl Schmitt as a foil for his reflections as well as that of Derrida, Benjamin, and Arendt. In this highly topical book, Agamben ultimately arrives at original ideas about the future of democracy and casts a new light on the hidden relationship that ties law to violence.

During the period between the two world wars, the Independent Labour Party (ILP) was the main voice of radical democratic socialism in Great Britain. Founded in 1893, the ILP had, since 1906, operated under the aegis of the Labour Party. As that party edged nearer to power following World War I, forming minority governments in 1924 and again in 1929, the ILP found its own identity under siege. On one side stood those who wanted the ILP to subordinate itself to an increasingly cautious and conventional Labour leadership; on the other stood those who felt that the ILP should throw its lot in with the Communist Party of Great Britain. After the ILP disaffiliated from Labour in 1932 in order to pursue a new, “revolutionary” policy, it was again torn, this time between those who wanted to merge with the Communists and those who saw the ILP as their more genuinely revolutionary and democratic rival. At the opening of the 1930s, the ILP boasted five times the membership of the Communist Party, as well as a sizeable contingent of MPs. By the end of the decade, having tested the possibility of creating a revolutionary party in Britain almost to the point of its own destruction, the ILP was much diminished—although, unlike the Communists, it still retained a foothold in Parliament. Despite this reversal of fortunes, during the 1930s—years that witnessed the ascendancy of both Stalin and Hitler—the ILP demonstrated an unswerving commitment to democratic socialist thinking. Drawing extensively on the ILP’s Labour Leader and other contemporary left-wing newspapers, as well as on ILP publications and internal party documents, Bullock examines the debates and ideological battles of the ILP during the tumultuous interwar period. He argues that the ILP made a lasting contribution to British politics in general, and to the modern Labour Party in particular, by preserving the values of democratic socialism during the interwar period.

All in all Steve Fraser had enjoyed his three-year stint in the former Dutch Southeast Asian colony of Sunda, and he’d been well compensated. But now he was looking forward to a last weekend in the capital before heading home. But Sunda was newly independent, and not entirely stable. An opposition faction with fundamentalist Islamic leanings was set on overthrowing the provisional government. And instead of enjoying a sybaritic weekend with the Eurasian beauty Rosalie, Fraser finds himself trapped with her by a fanatical group who’ve taken over the country’s radio station and made their headquarters in his friend Jebb’s apartment. As the government launches a counterattack, the couple’s survival depends on their ability to dodge bullets and the shifting loyalties of the coup’s lieutenants.

A compassionate and practical guide for parents facing the difficult task of raising children in an increasingly violent world. This intelligent, parent-centered reference takes a sympathetic yet tough-minded look at the forces that are shaping--and disrupting--American family life today.

Forensic science laboratories' reputations have increasingly come under fire. Incidents of tainted evidence, false reports, allegations of negligence, scientifically flawed testimony, or - worse yet - perjury in in-court testimony, have all served to cast a shadow over the forensic sciences. Instances of each are just a few of the quality-related charges made in the last few years. Forensic Science Under Siege is the first book to integrate and explain these problematic trends in forensic science. The issues are timely, and are approached from an investigatory, yet scholarly and research-driven, perspective. Leading experts are consulted and interviewed, including directors of highly visible forensic laboratories, as well as medical examiners and coroners who are commandeering the discussions related to these issues. Interviewees include Henry Lee, Richard Saferstein, Cyril Wecht, and many others. The ultimate consequences of all these pressures, as well as the future of forensic science, has yet to be determined. This book examines these challenges, while also exploring possible solutions (such as the formation of a forensic science consortium to address specific legislative issues). It is a must-read for all forensic scientists. - Provides insight on the current state of forensic science, demands, and future direction as provided by leading experts in the field - Consolidates the current state of standards and best-practices of labs across disciplines - Discusses a controversial topic that must be addressed for political support and financial funding of forensic science to improve

The Constitution Besieged offers a compelling reinterpretation of one of the most notorious periods in American constitutional history. In the decades following the Civil War, federal and state judges struck down as unconstitutional a great deal of innovative social and economic legislation. Scholars have traditionally viewed this as the work of a conservative judiciary more interested in promoting laissez-faire economics than in interpreting the Constitution. Howard Gillman challenges this scholarly orthodoxy by showing how these judges were in fact observing a long-standing constitutional prohibition against "class legislation." By reviewing unfamiliar state cases and legal commentary, and by providing fresh interpretations of familiar Supreme Court cases, Gillman uncovers a fascinating - and long forgotten - legal tradition. In this richly textured historical narrative, we see how American judges once worked to insure that legislative power be used only to promote the public good, and not to benefit certain classes or burden their market competitors. Beyond shedding new light on this jurisprudence, Gillman also links it to larger debates in the political system, debates traced to concerns about factional politics expressed by the country's founders and to the Jacksonian assault on special privileges. This tradition came under siege with the intensification of class conflict at the turn of the century, and Gillman carefully documents its demise. He details how industrialization undermined assumptions about the fairness of capitalist social relations, and how this led increasing numbers of people to question the requirement that the state remain neutral in matters of class conflict - thus leaving it to a stalwart judiciary to protect "a Constitution besieged." A major contribution to an understanding of this important period in the history of the Supreme Court, Gillman's work stands as a landmark in revisionist accounts of the "Lochner era." Gillman's study represents the kind of paradigm-shift that will undoubtedly affect a wide range of scholarly activity for some time to come. The broad scope of this work makes it essential reading for those interested in American political thought, the development of the American state, the relationship between law and social change, and contemporary debates about the original intent of the framers of the Constitution and the proper role of the judiciary in American politics.