Since the Second World War, constitutional justice has spread through much of the democratic world. Often it has followed in the wake of national calamity and historical evil - whether fascism or communism, colonialism or apartheid. Unsurprisingly, the memory of such evils plays a prominent role in constitutional adjudication. This book explores the relationship between constitutional interpretation and the memory of historical evil. Specifically, it examines how the constitutional courts of the United States, Germany, and South Africa have grappled, respectively, with the legacies of slavery, Nazism, and apartheid.
Most courts invoke historical evil through either the parenthetical or the redemptive mode of constitutional memory. The parenthetical framework views the evil era as exceptional - a baleful aberration from an otherwise noble and worthy constitutional tradition. Parenthetical jurisprudence reaches beyond the evil era toward stable and enduring values. It sees the constitutional response to evil as restorative rather than revolutionary - a return to and reaffirmation of older traditions. The redemptive mode, by contrast, is more aggressive. Its aim is not to resume a venerable tradition but to reverse recent ills. Its animating spirit is not restoration, but antithesis. Its aim is not continuity with deeper pasts, but a redemptive future stemming from a stark, complete, and vivid rupture.
This book demonstrates how, across the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode has often accompanied formalist and originalist approaches to constitutional interpretation, whereas the redemptive mode has accompanied realist and purposive approaches. It also shows how, within the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode of memory has consistently predominated in American constitutional jurisprudence; the redemptive mode in South African jurisprudence; and a hybrid, parenthetical-redemptive mode in German constitutional jurisprudence. The real-world consequences of these trends have been stark and dramatic. Memory matters, especially in constitutional interpretation.
Les informations fournies dans la section « Synopsis » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
Justin Collings is Professor of Law at the J. Reuben Clark Law School of Brigham Young University, where he has taught since 2013. He is the author of Democracy's Guardians: A History of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 1951-2001 (OUP, 2015). He holds both a PhD in History and a JD from Yale University and was a law clerk to the Honourable Guido Calabresi at the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Les informations fournies dans la section « A propos du livre » peuvent faire référence à une autre édition de ce titre.
Vendeur : Prior Books Ltd, Cheltenham, Royaume-Uni
Hardcover. Etat : New. Etat de la jaquette : New. First Edition. Dark blue hardback with gilt lettered spine, complete with original dustjacket. In new condition: firm and square with strong joints, no bumps, no rubs. Contents are crisp, tight and clean; no pen-marks. Thus a very nice copy that looks and feels unread, now offered for sale at a very reasonable price. N° de réf. du vendeur 209411
Quantité disponible : 1 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Brook Bookstore On Demand, Napoli, NA, Italie
Etat : new. N° de réf. du vendeur 439be414d257ea504aa621b6933b2cf8
Quantité disponible : 13 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Rarewaves.com USA, London, LONDO, Royaume-Uni
Hardback. Etat : New. Since the Second World War, constitutional justice has spread through much of the democratic world. Often it has followed in the wake of national calamity and historical evil - whether fascism or communism, colonialism or apartheid. Unsurprisingly, the memory of such evils plays a prominent role in constitutional adjudication. This book explores the relationship between constitutional interpretation and the memory of historical evil. Specifically, it examines how the constitutional courts of the United States, Germany, and South Africa have grappled, respectively, with the legacies of slavery, Nazism, and apartheid.Most courts invoke historical evil through either the parenthetical or the redemptive mode of constitutional memory. The parenthetical framework views the evil era as exceptional - a baleful aberration from an otherwise noble and worthy constitutional tradition. Parenthetical jurisprudence reaches beyond the evil era toward stable and enduring values. It sees the constitutional response to evil as restorative rather than revolutionary - a return to and reaffirmation of older traditions. The redemptive mode, by contrast, is more aggressive. Its aim is not to resume a venerable tradition but to reverse recent ills. Its animating spirit is not restoration, but antithesis. Its aim is not continuity with deeper pasts, but a redemptive future stemming from a stark, complete, and vivid rupture. This book demonstrates how, across the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode has often accompanied formalist and originalist approaches to constitutional interpretation, whereas the redemptive mode has accompanied realist and purposive approaches. It also shows how, within the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode of memory has consistently predominated in American constitutional jurisprudence; the redemptive mode in South African jurisprudence; and a hybrid, parenthetical-redemptive mode in German constitutional jurisprudence. The real-world consequences of these trends have been stark and dramatic. Memory matters, especially in constitutional interpretation. N° de réf. du vendeur LU-9780198858850
Quantité disponible : Plus de 20 disponibles
Vendeur : THE SAINT BOOKSTORE, Southport, Royaume-Uni
Hardback. Etat : New. This item is printed on demand. New copy - Usually dispatched within 5-9 working days. N° de réf. du vendeur C9780198858850
Quantité disponible : Plus de 20 disponibles
Vendeur : CitiRetail, Stevenage, Royaume-Uni
Hardcover. Etat : new. Hardcover. Since the Second World War, constitutional justice has spread through much of the democratic world. Often it has followed in the wake of national calamity and historical evil - whether fascism or communism, colonialism or apartheid. Unsurprisingly, the memory of such evils plays a prominent role in constitutional adjudication. This book explores the relationship between constitutional interpretation and the memory of historical evil. Specifically, it examines howthe constitutional courts of the United States, Germany, and South Africa have grappled, respectively, with the legacies of slavery, Nazism, and apartheid.Most courts invokehistorical evil through either the parenthetical or the redemptive mode of constitutional memory. The parenthetical framework views the evil era as exceptional - a baleful aberration from an otherwise noble and worthy constitutional tradition. Parenthetical jurisprudence reaches beyond the evil era toward stable and enduring values. It sees the constitutional response to evil as restorative rather than revolutionary - a return to and reaffirmation of older traditions. The redemptive mode, bycontrast, is more aggressive. Its aim is not to resume a venerable tradition but to reverse recent ills. Its animating spirit is not restoration, but antithesis. Its aim is not continuity with deeperpasts, but a redemptive future stemming from a stark, complete, and vivid rupture. This book demonstrates how, across the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode has often accompanied formalist and originalist approaches to constitutional interpretation, whereas the redemptive mode has accompanied realist and purposive approaches. It also shows how, within the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode of memory has consistently predominated in American constitutionaljurisprudence; the redemptive mode in South African jurisprudence; and a hybrid, parenthetical-redemptive mode in German constitutional jurisprudence. The real-world consequences of these trends havebeen stark and dramatic. Memory matters, especially in constitutional interpretation. This monograph explores how the constitutional courts in the United States, Germany, and South Africa have invoked slavery, Nazism, and apartheid - three historical evils - as an aid in constitutional interpretation. It examines how the memory of evil pasts moulds constitutional meaning in the contested present. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability. N° de réf. du vendeur 9780198858850
Quantité disponible : 1 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Revaluation Books, Exeter, Royaume-Uni
Hardcover. Etat : Brand New. 342 pages. 9.25x6.25x1.00 inches. In Stock. This item is printed on demand. N° de réf. du vendeur __019885885X
Quantité disponible : 1 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Books Puddle, New York, NY, Etats-Unis
Etat : New. Print on Demand. N° de réf. du vendeur 26388381438
Quantité disponible : 4 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Majestic Books, Hounslow, Royaume-Uni
Etat : New. Print on Demand. N° de réf. du vendeur 391218465
Quantité disponible : 4 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Biblios, Frankfurt am main, HESSE, Allemagne
Etat : New. PRINT ON DEMAND. N° de réf. du vendeur 18388381428
Quantité disponible : 4 disponible(s)
Vendeur : Grand Eagle Retail, Bensenville, IL, Etats-Unis
Hardcover. Etat : new. Hardcover. Since the Second World War, constitutional justice has spread through much of the democratic world. Often it has followed in the wake of national calamity and historical evil - whether fascism or communism, colonialism or apartheid. Unsurprisingly, the memory of such evils plays a prominent role in constitutional adjudication. This book explores the relationship between constitutional interpretation and the memory of historical evil. Specifically, it examines howthe constitutional courts of the United States, Germany, and South Africa have grappled, respectively, with the legacies of slavery, Nazism, and apartheid.Most courts invokehistorical evil through either the parenthetical or the redemptive mode of constitutional memory. The parenthetical framework views the evil era as exceptional - a baleful aberration from an otherwise noble and worthy constitutional tradition. Parenthetical jurisprudence reaches beyond the evil era toward stable and enduring values. It sees the constitutional response to evil as restorative rather than revolutionary - a return to and reaffirmation of older traditions. The redemptive mode, bycontrast, is more aggressive. Its aim is not to resume a venerable tradition but to reverse recent ills. Its animating spirit is not restoration, but antithesis. Its aim is not continuity with deeperpasts, but a redemptive future stemming from a stark, complete, and vivid rupture.This book demonstrates how, across the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode has often accompanied formalist and originalist approaches to constitutional interpretation, whereas the redemptive mode has accompanied realist and purposive approaches. It also shows how, within the three jurisdictions, the parenthetical mode of memory has consistently predominated in American constitutionaljurisprudence; the redemptive mode in South African jurisprudence; and a hybrid, parenthetical-redemptive mode in German constitutional jurisprudence. The real-world consequences of these trends havebeen stark and dramatic. Memory matters, especially in constitutional interpretation. This monograph explores how the constitutional courts in the United States, Germany, and South Africa have invoked slavery, Nazism, and apartheid - three historical evils - as an aid in constitutional interpretation. It examines how the memory of evil pasts moulds constitutional meaning in the contested present. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability. N° de réf. du vendeur 9780198858850
Quantité disponible : 1 disponible(s)