71870

With respect to "controversies between two or more states," the U.S. Constitution grants original jurisdiction to the U.S. Supreme Court, and in 1789 Congress made exclusive the Court's jurisdiction over interstate disputes. In this book, Joseph F. Zimmerman examines the role of the Supreme Court in settling disputes between states, the criteria developed by the Court to determine whether its original jurisdiction should be invoked, and the function of special masters, who, as adjuncts to the Court, facilitate negotiated settlements or provide the factual information needed by the Court to render sound decisions. Zimmerman analyzes a wide range of specific disputes, from boundary lines to financial matters to water allocation, diversion, and pollution. To alleviate the Court's exceptionally heavy and critically important appellate workload, the author proposes alternative mechanisms for resolving controversies between sister states, including interstate boundary compacts, interstate regulatory compacts, and several congressional initiatives.

The Founding Fathers guaranteed trial by jury three times in the Constitution—more than any other right—since juries can serve as the final check on government’s power to enforce unjust, immoral, or oppressive laws. But in America today, how independent c

Military Rules of Evidence Manual, Fourth Edition is the only publication of its kind available to both military & civilian attorneys that analyzes what the Rules say & mean to judges & counsel in the military justice system. It also serves as an authoritative case finder. Since the Rules became effective in 1980, this book has been cited hundreds of times by the military courts. This Fourth Edition provides notes to virtually every military case that has interpreted or applied the Rules.

Dedicated to the Sailors and Marines who lost their lives on the final voyage of USS Indianapolis and to those who survived the torment at sea following its sinking. plus the crews that risked their lives in rescue ships. The USS Indianapolis (CA-35) was a decorated World War II warship that is primarily remembered for her worst 15 minutes. . This ship earned ten (10) battle stars for her service in World War II and was credited for shooting down nine (9) enemy planes. However, this fame was overshadowed by the first 15 minutes July 30, 1945, when she was struck by two (2) torpedoes from Japanese submarine I-58 and sent to the bottom of the Philippine Sea. The sinking of Indianapolis and the loss of 880 crew out of 1,196 --most deaths occurring in the 4-5 day wait for a rescue delayed --is a tragedy in U.S. naval history. This historical reference showcases primary source documents to tell the story of Indianapolis, the history of this tragedy from the U.S. Navy perspective. It recounts the sinking, rescue efforts, follow-up investigations, aftermath and continuing communications efforts. Included are deck logs to better understand the ship location when she sunk and testimony of survivors and participants. For additional historical publications produced by the U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command, please check out these resources here: https://bookstore.gpo.gov/agency/naval-history-heritage-command Year 2016 marked the 71st anniversary of the sinking and another spike in public attention on the loss -- including a big screen adaptation of the story, talk of future films, documentaries, and planned expeditions to locate the wreckage of the warship.

Contemporary civil libertarians claim that their works preserve a worthy American tradition of defending free-speech rights dating back to the framing of the First Amendment. Transforming Free Speech challenges the worthiness, and indeed the very existence of one uninterrupted libertarian tradition. Mark A. Graber asserts that in the past, broader political visions inspired libertarian interpretations of the First Amendment. In reexamining the philosophical and jurisprudential foundations of the defense of expression rights from the Civil War to the present, he exposes the monolithic free-speech tradition as a myth. Instead of one conception of the system of free expression, two emerge: the conservative libertarian tradition that dominated discourse from the Civil War until World War I, and the civil libertarian tradition that dominates later twentieth-century argument. The essence of the current perception of the American free-speech tradition derives from the writings of Zechariah Chafee, Jr. (1885-1957), the progressive jurist most responsible for the modern interpretation of the First Amendment. His interpretation, however, deliberately obscured earlier libertarian arguments linking liberty of speech with liberty of property. Moreover, Chafee stunted the development of a more radical interpretation of expression rights that would give citizens the resources and independence necessary for the effective exercise of free speech. Instead, Chafee maintained that the right to political and social commentary could be protected independent of material inequalities that might restrict access to the marketplace of ideas. His influence enfeebled expression rights in a world where their exercise depends increasingly on economic power. Untangling the libertarian legacy, Graber points out the disjunction in the libertarian tradition to show that free-speech rights, having once been transformed, can be transformed again. Well-conceived and original in perspective, Transforming Free Speech will interest political theorists, students of government, and anyone interested in the origins of the free-speech tradition in the United States.

In this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases. Is a burrito a sandwich? Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy? If you trade a gun for drugs, are you using a gun in a drug transaction? The authors grapple with these and dozens of equally curious questions while explaining the most principled, lucid, and reliable techniques for deriving meaning from authoritative texts. Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence. What, exactly, is textualism? Why is strict construction a bad thing? What is the true doctrine of originalism? And which is more important: the spirit of the law, or the letter? The authors write with a well-argued point of view that is definitive yet nuanced, straightforward yet sophisticated.