Many rights that Americans cherish today go unmentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Where do these freedoms come from? John V. Orth answers that question in this unique and gem-like history of due process.
No person's life, liberty, or property may be taken without "due process of law." What exactly that means has been one of the most frequently asked questions in American constitutional history. Today, the answer is usually given in two parts: what procedures the government must follow and—in exceptional cases—what the government cannot do even if it follows the proper procedures. The procedural aspect of this answer has been far less controversial than "substantive due process," which at one time limited government regulation of business and today forbids the states from outlawing abortions.
"Due process of law," as a phrase and as a concept, was already old at the time it was adopted by American constitution-writers, both state and federal. Mindful of the English background and of constitutional developments in the several states, Orth in a succinct and readable narrative traces the history of due process, from its origins in medieval England to its applications in the latest cases.
Departing from the usual approach to American constitutional law, Orth places the history of due process in the larger context of the common law. To a degree not always appreciated today, constitutional law advances in the same case-by-case manner as other legal rules. In that light, Orth concentrates on the general maxims or paradigms that guided the judges in their decisions of specific cases. Uncovering the links between one case and another, Orth describes how a commitment to fair procedures made way for an emphasis on the protection of property rights, which in turn led to a heightened sensitivity to individual rights in general.
This unconventional history of the concept of due process heightens the reader's understanding of an important and vexed question of Anglo-American law and constitutionalism. Tracing the evolution of substantive due process through paradigmatic and exemplary cases, Orth explains in understandable terms the sources of controversial judicial rulings like Roe v. Wade.
... Reginald 184 McKibbin , R. 65 , 217 , 247 , 272 , 273 , 284 Mackintosh , Alphonso 162 Macmillan , Harold 298-9 mains ( dicing game ) 21 managers 200-5 , 400 Masterman , C. E. G. 183 match betting 218 Matthews , Charles 180 Matthews ...
Mark A. Graber, Howard Gillman ... 2 In an introduction to a work subtitled Lessons from the Confederate Constitution that rarely refers to slaves or slavery, Marshall L. DeRosa declares, “the model of government embodied in the CSA ...
12. 1807 Yours of the 3d . Int has been duly received . " The opinions which you give touching the case of Lee & Coulson have been always mine , ever since I examined the case . I now enclose you a Copy of Murdocks deposition .
196. Id. at 813-16 (Scalia, J., dissenting) (citing Romero v. Int'l Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 (1959); Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571 (1953); Murray v. Schooner Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch64)(l804)). 197. Id. at 8 1 7.
页末的这幅图片描绘了一个断头台的早期原型,名为“福尔布雷特”(字面意思是“下落的木板”)。在这个刑具中,没有锋利的(甚或金属的)刀片,通过迅速一击来使身首分离;相反,这个刑具只是由几块结实的橡木板构成。在锤击的作用下,厚钝的木板边缘可以砸烂受害者的 ...
1962年9月,美国司法部长罗伯特•肯尼迪主持召开“毒品滥用白宫会议”,开始从公众健康导向角度思考吸毒问题,尝试进行毒品贩卖者和毒品成瘾者之间的区分。1965年3月8日,约翰逊总统批准了《1965年药品滥用管制修正案》,对危险药品的非法使用进行严格管制, ...
Trial of the Chicago Eight (or Chicago Seven).
Papers of John Marshall: Vol. II: Correspondence and Papers, July 1788-December 1795, and Account Book, July 1788-December 1795
In its determination to preserve the century of revolution, Gale initiated a revolution of its own: digitization of epic proportions to preserve these invaluable works in the largest archive of its kind.
本书对古典私权一般理论的发展历程进行深入考察,包括考察其思想根源——盛行于17世纪末期至18世纪的德国自然权利义务理论;探究其对民法体系构造的影响,借此揭示潘得克吞式民法体系的形成原因与内在机理。