"Alison Gopnik, a ... developmental psychologist, [examines] the paradoxes of parenthood from a scientific perspective"--

The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure provides the bulwark for police regulation and many other government functions in the United States. This book tells the full story of its complex lineage, including its intellectual roots in England.

This pioneering work of political history recovers the central and largely forgotten role that petitioning played in the formative years of North American democracy. Known as the age of democracy, the nineteenth century witnessed the extension of the franchise and the rise of party politics. As Daniel Carpenter shows, however, democracy in America emerged not merely through elections and parties, but through the transformation of an ancient political tool: the petition. A statement of grievance accompanied by a list of signatures, the petition afforded women and men excluded from formal politics the chance to make their voices heard and to reshape the landscape of political possibility. Democracy by Petition traces the explosion and expansion of petitioning across the North American continent. Indigenous tribes in Canada, free Blacks from Boston to the British West Indies, Irish canal workers in Indiana, and Hispanic settlers in territorial New Mexico all used petitions to make claims on those in power. Petitions facilitated the extension of suffrage, the decline of feudal land tenure, and advances in liberty for women, African Americans, and Indigenous peoples. Even where petitioners failed in their immediate aims, their campaigns advanced democracy by setting agendas, recruiting people into political causes, and fostering aspirations of equality. Far more than periodic elections, petitions provided an everyday current of communication between officeholders and the people. The coming of democracy in America owes much to the unprecedented energy with which the petition was employed in the antebellum period. By uncovering this neglected yet vital strand of nineteenth-century life, Democracy by Petition will forever change how we understand our political history.

This book introduces the future of criminal law. It covers every aspect of crime in the digital age, assembled together for the first time. Topics range from Internet surveillance law and the Patriot Act to computer hacking laws and the Council of Europe cybercrime convention. More and more crimes involve digital evidence, and computer crime law will be an essential area for tomorrow's criminal law practitioners. Many U.S. Attorney's Offices have started computer crime units, as have many state Attorney General offices, and any student with a background in this emerging area of law will have a leg up on the competition. This is the first law school book dedicated entirely to computer crime law. The materials are authored entirely by Orin Kerr, a new star in the area of criminal law and Internet law who has recently published articles in the Harvard Law Review, Columbia Law Review, NYU Law Review, and Michigan Law Review. The book is filled with ideas for future scholarship, including hundreds of important questions that have never been addressed in the scholarly literature. The book reflects the author's practice experience, as well: Kerr was a computer crime prosecutor at the Justice Department for three years, and the book combines theoretical insights with practical tips for working with actual cases. Students will find it easy and fun to read, and professors will find it an angaging introduction to a new world of scholarly ideas. The book is ideally suited either for a 2-credit seminar or a 3-credit course, and should appeal both to criminal law professors and those interested in cyberlaw or law and technology. No advanced knowledge of computers and the Internet is required or assumed.

First published in 1954, this indispensable reference quickly became the gold standard for concise summaries of important U.S. Supreme Court cases. The only reference guide to Supreme Court cases organized both topically and chronologically within chapters so that readers understand how cases fit into a historical context, the 15th edition has been extensively revised to ensure that it remains the most up-to-date resource available. An essential resource for law students, lawyers, and everyone interested in our nation's Constitution and the Supreme Court decisions that explicate it.

Considered a premier assemblage artist, Betye Saar has been creating inspired pieces since the early 1960s. Her works are in the collections of notable museums like Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.; Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York City; Museum of Fine Art, Boston; The Studio Museum in Harlem; and San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. She has taught at the University of California and at the Parsons-Otis Institute, both in Los Angeles, and has participated in numerous solo and group exhibitions. Betye Saar is a comprehensive look at Saar's works, from the 1960 print Samsara to the powerful mixed-media assemblage Blackbird (2002), and a dynamic career.

Originalism holds that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to its meaning at the time it was enacted. In their innovative defense of originalism, John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport maintain that the text of the Constitution should be adhered to by the Supreme Court because it was enacted by supermajorities--both its original enactment under Article VII and subsequent Amendments under Article V. A text approved by supermajorities has special value in a democracy because it has unusually wide support and thus tends to maximize the welfare of the greatest number. The authors recognize and respond to many possible objections. Does originalism perpetuate the dead hand of the past? How can originalism be justified, given the exclusion of African Americans and women from the Constitution and many of its subsequent Amendments? What is originalism's place in interpretation, after two hundred years of non-originalist precedent? A fascinating counterfactual they pose is this: had the Supreme Court not interpreted the Constitution so freely, perhaps the nation would have resorted to the Article V amendment process more often and with greater effect. Their book will be an important contribution to the literature on originalism, now the most prominent theory of constitutional interpretation.