| عنوان : |
Settled versus right : a theory of precedent |
| نوع الوثيقة : |
نص مطبوع |
| مؤلفين : |
Randy J Kozel, مؤلف |
| ناشر : |
Cambridge, United Kingdom [etc.] : Cambridge university press |
| تاريخ النشر : |
2017 |
| عدد الصفحات : |
180 p. |
| Ill. : |
couv.ill. |
| الأبعاد : |
23 cm. |
| ISBN/ISSN/EAN : |
978-1-107-56652-1 |
| ثمن : |
6718.00 DA. |
| اللغة : |
إنكليزي (eng) |
| ترتيب : |
[كتب باللغة العربية]
|
| الكلمة المفتاح : |
300 - Sciences sociales United States,Supreme Court,Decision making |
| تكشيف : |
347 قانون الاجراءات الجنائية و المحاكم |
| خلاصة : |
"[This book] develops a theory of precedent designed to enhance the stability and impersonality of constitutional law. [The author] contends that the prevailing approach to precedent in American law is undermined by principled disagreements among judges over the proper means and ends of constitutional interpretation. The structure and composition of the doctrine all but guarantee that conclusions about the durability of precedent will track individual views about whether decisions are right or wrong, and whether mistakes are harmful or benign. This is a serious challenge, but it also reveals a path toward maintaining legal continuity even as judges come and go."-- |
Settled versus right : a theory of precedent [نص مطبوع ] / Randy J Kozel, مؤلف . - Cambridge, United Kingdom [etc.] : Cambridge university press, 2017 . - 180 p. : couv.ill. ; 23 cm. ISBN : 978-1-107-56652-1 : 6718.00 DA. اللغة : إنكليزي ( eng)
| ترتيب : |
[كتب باللغة العربية]
|
| الكلمة المفتاح : |
300 - Sciences sociales United States,Supreme Court,Decision making |
| تكشيف : |
347 قانون الاجراءات الجنائية و المحاكم |
| خلاصة : |
"[This book] develops a theory of precedent designed to enhance the stability and impersonality of constitutional law. [The author] contends that the prevailing approach to precedent in American law is undermined by principled disagreements among judges over the proper means and ends of constitutional interpretation. The structure and composition of the doctrine all but guarantee that conclusions about the durability of precedent will track individual views about whether decisions are right or wrong, and whether mistakes are harmful or benign. This is a serious challenge, but it also reveals a path toward maintaining legal continuity even as judges come and go."-- |
|
Affiner la recherche
