It argues that the development of human rights is an historical sign of progress in a world marked by the proliferation of cruel wars, the arms trade, pollution, famine and almost universal pessimism.

    The Brethren is the first detailed behind-the-scenes account of the Supreme Court in action.Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong have pierced its secrecy to give us an unprecedented view of the Chief and Associate Justices—maneuvering, arguing, politicking, compromising, and making decisions that affect every major area of American life.

    To most laymen this would seem to provide grounds for a new trial, but the fact is that until the Supreme Court heard Gideon's case, an indigent prisoner did not have the right to a lawyer in many state courts.The case of Gideon v. Wainwright changed all that. The Supreme Court decided to hear Gideon's plea, and it appointed Abe Fortas, a noted Washington lawyer, to represent him.On March 18, 1963, the Court announced its historic decision: the Justices unanimously overruled an earlier case and held that henceforth the "due process of law" guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment meant that poverty alone could not deprive a criminal defendant of the right to counsel. For Gideon this meant a new trial, and this time, with the help of a lawyer, he was acquitted.But Gideon's Trumpet is far more than the dramatic story of a single case whose reverberations will change the lives of thousands of other prisoners; it is also an inspiring examination and interpretation of the role of the Supreme Court itself. The reader learns much of the history of the Court, of the constitutional and criminal law in the United States, of the philosophies of law of various Justices, of changing historical interpretations of the Bill of Rights and its various amendments, and of the modus operandi of the Court day by day.Anthony Lewis writes about the complex and momentous issues involved in Gideon v. Wainwright with simplicity, clarity and precision, and his portrait of Gideon and his dogged fight for freedom is as poignant and, in the words of one distinguished reader, "as absorbing as the best fiction."

    The intense drama—both inside and outside the courtroom—builds to an unexpected climax in an unforgettable final chapter. Savannah Law is filled with colorful but believable characters, including a few cantankerous law professors, who demonstrate their vanity and eccentricities at the weekly faculty meetings. The novel will appeal to anyone who enjoys a legal thriller or Southern novel.

    In his acclaimed book―based on his legendary Harvard course―Sandel offers a rare education in thinking through the complicated issues and controversies we face in public life today. It has emerged as a most lucid and engaging guide for those who yearn for a more robust and thoughtful public discourse. "In terms we can all understand," wrote Jonathan Rauch in The New York Times, Justice "confronts us with the concepts that lurk . . . beneath our conflicts."Affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, the moral limits of markets―Sandel relates the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day, and shows how a surer grasp of philosophy can help us make sense of politics, morality, and our own convictions as well.Justice is lively, thought-provoking, and wise―an essential new addition to the small shelf of books that speak convincingly to the hard questions of our civic life.

    Supreme Court teaches us anything, it is that almost everything is open to interpretation. Almost. But what’s inarguable is that, while the Court has witnessed a succession of larger-than-life jurists in its two-hundred-year-plus history, it has never seen the likes of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.    Combative yet captivating, infuriating yet charming, the outspoken jurist remains a source of curiosity to observers across the political spectrum and on both sides of the ideological divide. And after nearly a quarter century on the bench, Scalia may be at the apex of his power. Agree with him or not, Scalia is “the justice who has had the most important impact over the years on how we think and talk about the law,” as the Harvard law dean Elena Kagan, now U.S. Solicitor General, once put it.Scalia electrifies audiences: to hear him speak is to remember him; to read his writing is to find his phrases permanently affixed in one’s mind. But for all his public grandstanding, Scalia has managed to elude biographers—until now. In American Original: The Life and Constitution of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the veteran Washington journalist Joan Biskupic presents for the first time a detailed portrait of this complicated figure and provides a comprehensive narrative that will engage Scalia’s adherents and critics alike. Drawing on her long tenure covering the Court, and on unprecedented access to the justice, Biskupic delves into the circumstances of his rise and the formation of his rigorous approach to the bench. Beginning with the influence of Scalia’s childhood in a first-generation Italian American home, American Original takes us through his formative years, his role in the Nixon-Ford administrations, and his trajectory through the Reagan revolution. Biskupic’s careful reporting culminates with the tumult of the contemporary Supreme Court—where it was and where it’s going, with Scalia helping to lead the charge.Even as Democrats control the current executive and legislative branches, the judicial branch remains rooted in conservatism. President Obama will likely appoint several new justices to the Court—but it could be years before those appointees change the tenor of the law. With his keen mind, authoritarian bent, and contentious rhetorical style, Scalia is a distinct and persuasive presence, and his tenure is far from over. This new book shows us the man in power: his world, his journey, and the far-reaching consequences of the transformed legal landscape.

    Fuller extends and clarifies his definition of the relation between law and morality put forward in the first (1964) edition of The Morality of Law. His original argument distinguishes between the morality of duty and the morality of aspiration, both of which bear on the design and operation of social institutions: the former by setting the necessary preconditions of any purposive social endeavor, the latter by suggesting the directions for such endeavor.                                                                                                                                                                                   In the revised edition, Fuller takes accurate aim at the school of legal philosophy called the New Analytical Jurists and continues his long-running debate with his major intellectual antagonist, H.L.A. Hart. Although the author calls the new chapter "A Reply to Critics," his expressed reason for undertaking it indicates that it is more than that: "As critical reviews of my book came in, I myself became increasingly aware of the extent to which the debate did indeed depend on 'starting points' - not on what the disputants said, but on what they considered it unnecessary to say, not on articulated principles but on tacit assumptions. What was needed, therefore, it seemed to me, was to bring these tacit assumptions to more adequate expression than either side has so far been able to do." There is no question that Mr. Fuller here gives the assumptions of his side adequate expression.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           “The volume must be regarded as an important contribution of general interest to the study of the nature and function of law…Trenchant comment abounds throughout the book, and there is an immense amount of the most valuable material here, as well as considerable food for the thought…his book deserves to reach a very wide audience.” – Law Times.“The book is a provocative one which is certain to excite much academic comment here and abroad.” – Harvard Law Record.“Although fully intelligible to the undergraduate, this book is likely to receive its warmest reception form advanced students of the philosophy of law, who will welcome the relief provided from the frequently sterile tone of much recent work in the field.” – Choice

    Kennedy Book Award Grand Prize"An original, wise and courageous work that moves beyond sterile arguments and lifts the discussion of race and justice to a new and more hopeful level."--Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.In this groundbreaking, powerfully reasoned, lucid work that is certain to provoke controversy, Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy takes on a highly complex issue in a way that no one has before. Kennedy uncovers the long-standing failure of the justice system to protect blacks from criminals, probing allegations that blacks are victimized on a widespread basis by racially discriminatory prosecutions and punishments, but he also engages the debate over the wisdom and legality of using racial criteria in jury selection. He analyzes the responses of the legal system to accusations that appeals to racial prejudice have rendered trials unfair, and examines the idea that, under certain circumstances, members of one race are statistically more likely to be involved in crime than members of another."An admirable, courageous, and meticulously fair and honest book."--New York Times Book Review"This book should be a standard for all law students."--Boston Globe

    Palkhivala, a multi-talented personality, played diverse roles in his life—lawyer, diplomat, orator, author, political and economic thinker, and social reformer. An advocate of civil liberties, he proactively defended the Constitution and the principles enshrined in it.This book contains select quotations—classified subject-wise under various chapters—from his writings and speeches over six decades of his working life. The book introduces the man through his thoughts and ideas with the aim of inspiring readers, particularly the youth.

    He's also got one of the most interesting CVs I have ever seen.' - Sarah Brett, BBC Radio Five LiveGARY BELL QC is one of Britain's top barristers, with his own hit BBC TV show, a Who's Who entry and a wife whose family is listed in Burke's Landed Gentry.But behind his silk gown and horsehair wig is a compelling and hilarious backstory.The chronic bedwetting son of a teenaged cigarette factory worker and a nineteen-year-old miner, Gary grew up in a condemned Nottingham slum, and left his tough comprehensive school without taking any exams to follow his dad down the pit.He spent his teenage years as a drunken football hooligan known as 'Animal' (for his terrible eating habits, not his fighting skills), baking pies at Pork Farms, stacking shelves at Asda, and trying and failing to become (among other things) a miner, a bricklayer, and a fireman. After being convicted of fraud and sentenced to six months (he worked out how to fiddle pub fruit machines), he was homeless for some years.Finally deciding to make something of himself, he took O and A levels and hitch-hiked to Bristol University as a mature law student in his mid 20s. After three hilarious years - he somehow managed to wangle a job with a Beverly Hills law firm before he'd even graduated - he went on to become a barrister and, twenty years later, achieved the rare honour of being appointed Queen's Counsel.His preposterous story - which contains some fascinating details of the many major cases he has worked on - reads like a strange dream and redefines the word 'amazing', as well as being extremely funny, very moving, and utterly life-affirming.

    Martin's in 1958, Robert Traver's Anatomy of a Murder immediately became the number-one bestseller in America, and was subsequently turned into the successful and now classic Otto Preminger film. It is not only the most popular courtroom drama in American fiction, but one of the most popular novels of our time.A gripping tale of deceit, murder, and a sensational trial, Anatomy of a Murder is unmatched in the authenticity of its settings, events, and characters. This new edition should delight both loyal fans of the past and an entire new generation of readers.

    So you want to know how to compose the winning arguent? How to prepare it? Deliver it? Spense believes that argument begins with the person, and that to argue successfully one must accomplish more than mere teechnique. He maintains that success in arguments, as in life, is a derivative of personal growth, of discoverring who we are, and embracing the uniqueness that is individual to each of us. The Laws of Arguing According to Gerry Spence1. Everyone is capable of making the winning aargument.2. Winning is getting what we want, which also means helping "others" get what they want.3. Learn that words are a weapon, and can be used hostilely in combat.4. Know that there is always a "biological advantage" of delivering the TRUTH.5. Assault is not argument.6. Use fear as an ally in pubic speaking or in argument. Learn to convert its energy.7. Let emotions show and don't discourage passion.8. Don't be blinded by brilliance.9. Learn to speak with the body. The body sometimes speaks more powerfully than words. 10 Know that the enemy is not the person with whom we are engaged in a failing argument, but the vision within ourselves

    Rumsfeld (executive power to detain enemy combatants), Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs and Tennessee v. Lane (sovereign immunity), Gonzales v. Raich (Congress's ability to prohibit possession and cultivation of marijuana for medicinal purposes), Kelo v. City of New London (takings clause), Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (equal protection), Lawrence v. Texas (sexual privacy), and Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (vouchers)

    He offers new insights into what makes a claim of conscience distinctively religious, and draws on a wealth of examples from America, Europe, and elsewhere to highlight the important issues at stake. With philosophical acuity, legal insight, and wry humor, Leiter shows why our reasons for tolerating religion are not specific to religion but apply to all claims of conscience, and why a government committed to liberty of conscience is not required by the principle of toleration to grant exemptions to laws that promote the general welfare.