The Thought of Samuel J. Levine at the Intersection of the Talmudic and Constitutional Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-235
Author(s):  
Jeffrey B. Meyers
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Professional Ethics ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
Jewish Ethics ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Law ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Theory Of Law

Samuel J. Levine’s research and writing collected in the two-volume anthology, Jewish Law and American Law: A Comparative Study addresses the connection between contemporary American Law and ancient Talmudic Law through the lens of contemporary Constitutional Law and Professional Ethics. Professor Levine mines the legacy of the late Robert Cover and his theory of law and narrative in particular to draw out the similarities and differences between rabbinic interpretation of the Torah and judicial interpretation of the US Constitution. He also considers where Jewish ethics converge and diverge from professional rules of conduct in the legal profession. This article summarizes some of the key turns in Levine’s recently published collected works and reflects critically on their key themes.

American Law and Market Integration

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Market Integration ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Commerce Clause ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Law ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

What is the structure of the ‘American’ market; and how was the latter ‘established’? When the Philadelphia Convention debated the 1787 Constitution, there was little argument that the (new) Union needed the power to regulate commerce. This chapter analyses the constitutional principles that governed the building (and evolution) of the US ‘common market’. Would interstate barriers to trade be ‘regulated’ away by the federal legislature; or would the Commerce Clause operate as a directly effective judicial norm? And more importantly: what type of common market had the US Constitution wished to establish? Section I explores these questions in the context of the liberalization of regulatory restrictions to the free movement of goods. Section II extends the analysis to fiscal barriers, which have traditionally been subject to special constitutional principles.

Transfer of Ownership In E-Commerce Transactions from the Perspective of Jewish Law: In Light of Israeli and American Law

2010 ◽  
pp. 498-522
Author(s):  
Ron S. Kleinman ◽  
Amal Jabareen
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Electronic Commerce ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Online Sales ◽  
Legal Regimes ◽  
American Law ◽  
Critical Scrutiny ◽  
Similarities And Differences

Do the practices of electronic commerce in general and online sales transactions, in particular, have halakhic validity, and, if so, how exactly do they derive their legal halakhic validity? This article attempts to answer the above questions based on critical scrutiny of the writings of contemporary halakhic scholars who have addressed this issue. These questions are examined in view of the principles pertaining to modes of acquisition in Jewish law and in light of two other legal regimes—Israeli law and American law. The validity of online sales transactions according to Jewish law depends largely on local custom and civil law, are explained in details as this article proceeds. This article presents a comparative study of the similarities and differences between Jewish law and other legal systems, as they relate to e-commerce. This article very carefully demonstrates various transactions and components related to Jewish law which winds up this article.

Is Racial Equality Unconstitutional?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Golub
Keyword(s):  
Racial Equality ◽  
Racial Consciousness ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Racial Democracy ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Law ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Color Blind

Discussions of race in American law and politics have been captured by the figure of the color-blind Constitution. Whether embraced as an ideal of constitutional equality or rejected for perpetuating historical injustice, advocates and critics alike view color-blindness as a refusal of racial consciousness rather than its mobilization. And yet, enacting a color-blind rule may be understood in itself to affect a heightened awareness of race. Accordingly, color-blind constitutionalism represents a particular form of racial consciousness rather than an alternative to it. Challenging familiar understandings of race, rights, and the US Constitution, this book explores how current equal protection law renders the pursuit of racial equality constitutionally suspect. Identifying hierarchy rather than equality as an enduring constitutional norm, Is Racial Equality Unconstitutional? reveals the historical reception of racial equality as a violation of white rights. Arguing against both conservative and liberal redemption narratives, within which racial equality is imagined as the perfection of American democracy, the book calls instead for a break from the constitutional order and refounding upon principles of racial democracy.

The Rights of the Accused under the Rome Statute and the US Bill of Rights: Has 20 Years of ICC Jurisprudence Brought Those Together?

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 318-366
Author(s):  
Kacper Zajac
Keyword(s):  
Rome Statute ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Disclosure Obligations ◽  
Made In

Abstract The alleged lower standard of the rights of the accused under the Rome Statute compared to those guaranteed by the US Constitution was one of the most important areas of criticism of the Rome Statute by American scholars. This criticism was made in the early 2000s and was based on the text of the Rome Statute alone, before any ICC jurisprudence existed. This article draws on the 20 years of operation of the ICC to ascertain whether the judicial interpretation and application of the procedural rights of the defendant, guaranteed under the Rome Statute, have made them more compatible with their counterparts under the US Constitution. The premise of this article is that the 20 years of interpretation and application of those rights may have strengthened them to the point where the gap between the procedural guarantees under the Rome Statute and the US Constitution has become negligible. This, in turn, would make the early criticism of the ICC system obsolete, at least insofar as the legal argument is concerned. Accordingly, this paper examines existing jurisprudence of the ICC in the areas of prosecutorial disclosure obligations, admission of evidence and the examination of witnesses. This is for several reasons: firstly, the selected three rights were among those criticised by American scholars in the early 2000s as falling short of what was required under the US Constitution; secondly, unlike some other criticised rights, which reflect the ICC’s institutional design and, therefore, are unlikely to change in scope, the selected three are relatively vaguely phrased, thus making it possible to transform their meaning through judicial interpretation; thirdly, the selected rights have been sufficiently elaborated on by the ICC through case law so as to carry a meaning exceeding what the Rome Statute alone provides. The findings of the study indicate that inasmuch as the ICC’s jurisprudence has moved some aspects of the three areas under examination towards their counterparts under the US Constitution, the procedural rights of the defendant before American courts generally remain more robust.

scholarly journals The Right to free and fair elections: an analysis of the approach of the American Law Doctrine on ballot secrecy

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 100
Author(s):  
Ada Guven
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
The People ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Law ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
The Right ◽  
Democratic Elections

This article offers a description of the concept free and fair election being the most fundamental principle defining credible elections is that they must reflect the free expression of the will of the people. Human rights treaties and international law doctrine have established that in order to hold democratic elections, states should assure their transparency, accountability and most of all must be inclusive by giving any citizen the equal opportunities to participate and be elected in the elections. These broad principles are strengthened by several electoral process-related responsibilities, as well as several key rights and freedoms, each of which derive from public international law. The paper aim in the second part to analyse the article of the US constitution that provide for the criteria of free and fair elections and more specifically the principle of ballot secrecy. Furthermore, the article will analyse the caselaw of the Supreme Court of US regarding the right to vote and elections and the interpretation of this Court in the application of the legislation.

COMPARATIVE METHOD IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: BETWEEN PRESUMPTIONS OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 84-113
Author(s):  
ALEXANDRA A. TROITSKAYA
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Middle Level ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Universal Principles ◽  
The World ◽  
Similarities And Differences

The two main approaches to the use of the comparative method in legal research, functional and cultural, have some "predetermined" considerations regarding the results that will (or should) be discovered by comparing various legal phenomena — should the emphasis be on similarities or differences between these phenomena. These considerations are based on the vision of, respectively, the universal or pluralistic nature of law of various societies, and in fact they are able to correct substantially the process of cognition of legal phenomena using the comparative method, adjusting it to the desired result. In the case of similarities, we can talk about artificially narrowing the circle of countries under investigation. In the case of differences, the isolation of systems and the uniqueness of their cultural characteristics are unreasonably exaggerated. The alternative assumptions presented in the theory of comparative law regarding the existence of universal principles of law or the fundamental uniqueness of each legal system require a critical rethinking of constitutional provisions and practice in comparative studies. The use of the comparative method in constitutional law is not reducible to the implementation of the ideas of political philosophy, and objective conclusions should not be replaced by predetermined normative guidelines. The similarities and differences revealed by the researcher of constitutional ideas, norms and practices can be considered as a result of comparison of independent value.Constitutional law is associated with a variety of substantial constructs existing in the world, not excluding, however, their intercommunication. Understanding these constructions requires attention to both the similarities and the differences in specific legal orders (as well as the reasons for their functioning in this, and not another form). The use of the comparative method in the absence of striving for predetermined results is simultaneously aimed at understanding the laws of development of constitutional institutions and maintaining the horizon of their diversity as an important component of this development. Each time, the researcher should distance himself from his prejudices regarding the similarities or differences between the institutes under study, rechecking whether the obtained results are really the results of applying the comparative method, and not the initial constructions.The logic of a comparative study corresponds to the construction of theories of "middle level", aimed at forming the theoretical model of a particular legal in-stitution, taking into account the practice of implementing this institution in specific states. The focus on middle-level theories within the framework of the comparative method allows one to go beyond the description of single systems, formulate conclusions at the level of generalization that ensure the comparability of the studied objects, and at the same time maintain an understanding of the diversity of constitutional models.

Scripturalizing and the Second Amendment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosamond C. Rodman
Keyword(s):  
White Women ◽  
White Children ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Second Amendment ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Status ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Half Decade

Expanding beyond the text of the Bible, this chapter explores instead a piece of political scripture, namely the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Over the last half-decade, the Second Amendment has come to enjoy the status of a kind of scripture-within-scripture. Vaulted to a much more prominent status than it had held in the first 150 years or so of its existence, and having undergone a remarkable shift in what most Americans think it means, the Second Amendment provides an opportunity to examine the linguistic, racial, and gendered modes by which these changes were effected, paying particular attention to the ways in which white children and white women were conscripted into the role of the masculine, frontier-defending US citizen.

scholarly journals Representing, commemorating, and memorizing terrorist attacks: Discussing the US and French experiences

2021 ◽  
pp. 263300242110244
Author(s):  
Alice M. Greenwald ◽  
Clifford Chanin ◽  
Henry Rousso ◽  
Michel Wieviorka ◽  
Mohamed-Ali Adraoui
Keyword(s):  
Historical Context ◽  
The United States ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
The Political ◽  
Modes Of Operation ◽  
The Us ◽  
Places Of Memory ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Do So

How do societies and states represent the historical, moral, and political weight of the terrorist attacks they have had to face? Having suffered in recent years from numerous terrorist attacks on their soil originating from jihadist movements, and often led by actors who were also their own citizens, France and the United States have set up—or seek to do so—places of memory whose functions, conditions of creation, modes of operation, and nature of the messages sent may vary. Three of the main protagonists and initiators of two museum-memorial projects linked to terrorist attacks have agreed to deliver their visions of the role and of the political, social, and historical context in which these projects have emerged. Allowing to observe similarities and differences between the American and French approach, this interview sheds light on the place of memory and feeling in societies struck by tragic events and seeking to cure their ills through memory and commemoration.

scholarly journals Dirty tricks on the underground press

1981 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-50
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Rips
Keyword(s):  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Underground Press ◽  
General Terms ◽  
The Us ◽  
Psychedelic Drugs ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
The Vietnam War ◽  
The 1960S

What was known in the United States as the ‘underground press’ – self-published newspapers of the youth counterculture sold at street corners and around campuses in American cities during the 1960s and early 70 s – was once a significant network estimated at over 400 publications. Their hallmark was opposition to US involvement in the Vietnam War, criticism of the authorities, of uncontrolled technology and big business, advocacy of sexual freedom and artistic experimentation and, frequently, the advocacy of marijuana, LSD and other psychedelic drugs. Few of these publications have survived the past ten years, and their disappearance has been variously attributed to the cooling of radical interest after the American withdrawal from Vietnam, as well as to the vague and shifting nature of the ‘hippie’ scene. Complaints by their publishers during the early and mid-seventies that printers refused their business, that office rents suddenly doubled, that advertising was cancelled, that papers were lost – these were seen as local accidents and were rarely reported by the established media. Claims of official or officially-sanctioned harassment were dismissed – even by fellow radicals – as paranoid. Recent research by Geoffrey Rips of the PEN American Center has revealed the extent and variety of official pressure exerted against alternative publications during the Vietnam War period. Using evidence from government hearings like the Church Committee, which reported in 1976, actual FBI documents released to American PEN under the Freedom of Information Act, and other sources, Mr Rips argues that such harassment contributed materially to the closure of certain publications and in general terms constituted a gross infringement on the protection afforded to dissenting opinion and to a free press under the US constitution. We publish edited extracts here from Geoffrey Rips' report which will be published in full by the PEN American Center and the City Lights Press.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document