Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "U.S. Supreme Court" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5
    Tytuł:
    The U.S. Supreme Court and the Cold War: Fear V. Security. The Times of Vinson Court and Warren Court
    Autorzy:
    Laidler, Pawel
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2028489.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2007-12-31
    Wydawca:
    Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
    Tematy:
    fear v. security
    U.S. Supreme Court
    cold war
    Opis:
    The main field of my study concerns the role of the Supreme Court in American legal and political system. My research frequently focuses on the case law, especially on some of the most important cases in the Court’s history, and on their influence on the whole of political, economic, and social relations of the country. I personally believe that American federal judges – among whom the most influential are the Justices of the Supreme Court – have gained more power than the Framers of the Constitution agreed to give them. Such situation occurred mostly because of the creation of the power of judicial review by the Supreme Court, which allowed the judiciary to determine the contitutionality of acts created by the other branches of government.
    Źródło:
    Polish Political Science Yearbook; 2007, 36; 159-173
    0208-7375
    Pojawia się w:
    Polish Political Science Yearbook
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    U.S. Supreme Court in the civil rights era: Deliberative Democracy and its educative institutional role, 1950s–1970s
    Autorzy:
    Figueroa, Carlos
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/652827.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2018
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
    Tematy:
    educative court
    deliberative democracy
    judicial review
    U.S. Supreme Court
    ethical responsibility
    Opis:
    This article examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s lesser-known educative role as an egalitarian institution within a broader deliberative democratic process. Scholars have argued that the Court’s long asserted power of judicial review, especially in the equal protection and civil rights context, has been an over-reach of the judicial branch’s constitutional authority and responsibilities. Normative and empirical critiques have been centered on the aims of judicial review, and the challenges it poses in American political life. A core issue surrounding these critiques is that Justices are appointed not elected, and thus undermine the principle of majority rule in the U.S. constitutional democratic order. Although these critiques are legitimate in terms of claims about unelected Supreme Court Justices’ seemingly discretionary powers over elected legislative bodies, and the uncertain policy implications of judicial pronouncements on the broader society, there is, nevertheless, a positive application of judicial review as a tool Justices use as part of their educative role overcoming the so-called “counter-majoritarian difficulty.” Through a close reading of oral arguments in Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez (1973)-two landmark cases invoking the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution-the article shows how appointed Justices adjudicate individual cases on appeal and attempt to educate (through an argumentative, reason-based and question-centered process) citizenlitigants and their legal representatives about the importance of equality, fairness and ethical responsibility even prior to rendering final decisions on policy controversies that have broader national social, political and economic implications.
    Źródło:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym; 2018, 21, 4; 59-88
    1899-2226
    2353-4869
    Pojawia się w:
    Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    To Overrule or Not? Precedent and the United States Supreme Court
    Autorzy:
    Segall, Eric J.
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/619019.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2018
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
    Tematy:
    precedent
    stare decisis
    overruling
    U.S. Supreme Court
    precedens
    przełamanie
    Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednocznych
    Opis:
    The principle of stare decisis in United States courts appears in two aspects – the courts of lower jurisdiction are bound by the rulings issued by the courts of higher jurisdictions and as a horizontal binding of the Supreme Court by its own rulings. The latter ‘binding’ is not as strong as the former one, which is reflected in the Supreme Court judges’ opinions and actions, which consist in both overruling their own precedents and highlighting the need for maintaining them. The changes of the Justices’ attitudes leads to a negative answer to the question whether precedent – which is binding only when the Supreme Court’s justices want it to be to be so – is binding precedent at all.
    Formuła stare decisis w porządku common law występuje w dwóch aspektach – jako związanie sądów niższych orzeczeniami sądów wyższych oraz jako horyzontalne związanie Sądu Najwyższego własnymi decyzjami. To drugie „związanie” nie jest tak mocne, jak to pierwsze, co przejawia się w przekonaniach i działaniach sędziów tego sądu, które polegają tak na przełamywaniu swoich precedensów, jak i na podkreślaniu potrzeby ich podtrzymywania. Dają się zauważyć w tym kontekście zmiany stanowiska sądu w różnych okresach jego funkcjonowania, co prowadzi jednak do negatywnej odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy precedens, który wiąże jedynie wówczas, gdy chcą tego sędziowie Sądu Najwyższego, jest w ogóle precedensem wiążącym.
    Źródło:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia; 2018, 27, 1
    1731-6375
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Aggressive Judicial Review, Political Ideology, and the Rule of Law
    Autorzy:
    J, Segall, Eric
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/902971.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019-05-04
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
    Tematy:
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Constitutional Law
    Constitutional Interpretation
    Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednoczonych
    prawo konstytucyjne
    interpretacja konstytucji
    Opis:
    For over one-hundred and fifty years, the United States Supreme Court has been the most powerful judicial body in the world with life-tenured judges consistently invalidating state and federal laws without clear support in constitutional text or history. This paper focuses on what should be the appropriate role of life-tenured, unelected federal judges in the American system of separation of powers. The tension is between wanting judges to enforce the supreme law of the Constitution while at the same time keeping judges within their assigned roles of enforcing not making the law. Much of constitutional scholarship in the United States is devoted to resolving this tension. This article argues that the Court should take a set back and defer more to elected leaders and voters. Although structural reform might help, most needed changes would require a constitutional amendment and are therefore unlikely to occur. The Justices should take it upon themselves to act with more humility and modesty and only overturn laws where there is strong evidence of clear constitutional error.
    Źródło:
    Studia Iuridica; 2019, 79; 68-77
    0137-4346
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Iuridica
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Legal analysis of the U.S. supreme court position upon a safe berth warranty and evaluation of the UK legal position
    Autorzy:
    Boviatsis, M.
    Daniil, G.
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2086297.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2022
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Morski w Gdyni. Wydział Nawigacyjny
    Tematy:
    safety at sea
    safe berth
    U.S. Supreme Court
    legal analysis
    legal aspects
    charterparty
    due diligence
    legal dispute
    Opis:
    This research is focused upon the evaluation of safe berth clause pursuant to US law, in conjunction with UK law, based on the recent US Supreme Court ruling over “ATHOS I”, which was fixed pursuant to an ASBATANKVOY charterparty to carry a cargo of heavy crude oil from Venezuela to Paulsboro, New Jersey. The dispute arose during the final stretch of the voyage, as the vessel entered the Delaware River, an uncharted abandoned ship anchor ruptured the vessel’s hull causing 264,000 gallons of oil to spill. The Oil Pollution Act 1990 required the Owners to fund the clean-up costs in the first instance (limited to US$45 million) and the US Federal Government’s Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund reimbursed Owners for an additional US$88 million in clean-up costs. Owners and the US Federal Government filed suit against voyage charterers for breach of the ASBATANKVOY charterparty safe berth clause. The case went through two trials, and before the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit twice, before the Supreme Court were asked to determine ultimate liability. The question before the Court was whether the safe berth clause was a warranty of safety, which meant that liability for an unsafe berth would be imposed on voyage charterers irrespective of whether they exercised due diligence. The answer to that question was yes; the language of the safe berth clause in this case was unambiguous and unqualified. The obligation on the voyage charterers was to designate a berth that was free from harm or risk such that the vessel come and go from always safely afloat. The Court went on to comment that “charterers remain free to contract around unqualified language that would otherwise establish a warranty of safety, by expressly limiting the extent of their obligations or liability. In the absence of any such qualifying language however the Supreme Court has made it clear that a charterer is liable to the owner for any consequences arising out of the ship being ordered to an unsafe berth, an obligation unfettered by any issues of due diligence or the degree of knowledge on the part of the charterer.
    Źródło:
    TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation; 2022, 16, 1; 27--32
    2083-6473
    2083-6481
    Pojawia się w:
    TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies