Yahoo Search Búsqueda en la Web

Resultado de búsqueda

  1. Alan Dershowitz is especially well-qualified to comment upon the disgraceful elections of 2000. He concludes that the Supreme Court's reputation has been sullied and that by setting such an unfavourable precedent the American judicial system will be criticised for its lack of fairness at home and abroad.

  2. 8 de ene. de 2018 · In Supreme Injustice, the distinguished legal historian Paul Finkelman establishes an authoritative account of each justice’s proslavery position, the reasoning behind his opposition to black freedom, and the incentives created by circumstances in his private life.

    • Paul Finkelman
  3. 18 de ene. de 2019 · In “Supreme Injustice: Slavery in the Nation’s Highest Court,” veteran historian Paul Finkelman argues that this grim legacy could have been avoided or, at least, mitigated. Mr. Finkelman ...

  4. 12 de oct. de 2020 · "The U.S. Supreme Court of the 1960s and 1970s is typically celebrated by liberals and condemned by conservatives for its rulings on abortion, birth control, and other sexual matters. In this new work, historian Marc Stein demonstrates convincingly that both sides have it wrong.

  5. 1 de jun. de 2001 · In 'Supreme Injustice', Alan Dershowitz will approach the ruling systematically from historical, political , and legal grounds. His ultimate conclusion will be that the Supreme Court did more damage to itself than is apparent now, creating a disturbing precedent that will come back to haunt it, and sullying its and the American judicial system's reputation for fairness at home and abroad.

  6. Supreme Injustice is part of a necessary and ongoing reconsidera-tion of these and other pre-Civil War jurists contributions to slavery law, which is an essential component of an understanding of slavery s place in the nation s legal, social, economic, political, intellectual, and religious history.

  7. 8 de ene. de 2018 · Supreme Injustice contains no call to topple monuments or to rewrite history books. [Finkelman] simply lays out a convincing case that we must in thinking about our national heritage grapple with the unsettling truths about the humanity we denied slaves and the legal protections we gave their owners.