Constitutional Law in a Nutshell (Nutshells). Questo articolo non è disponibile.
29 valutazioni di Goodreads
Lingua: inglese
Editore: West Academic Publishing, 2016
- Brossura
- Usato

Da: clickgoodwillbooks, Indianapolis, IN, U.S.A.clickgoodwillbooks
Venditore con 4 stelle
Venditore AbeBooks dal 5 luglio 2024
Non disponibile
Brossura
Condizione: Usato - Discreto
EUR 2,69
Descrizione dell’articolo da parte del venditore
Used - Acceptable: All pages and the cover are intact, but shrink wrap, dust covers, or boxed set case may be missing. Pages may include limited notes, highlighting, or minor water damage but the text is readable. Item may be missing bundled media.
Codice articolo 3O6ZVA0000UL_ns
- Titolo
- Constitutional Law in a Nutshell (Nutshells)
- Autore
- Barron, Jerome
- Editore
- West Academic Publishing
- Anno di pubblicazione
- 2016
- Condizione
- acceptable
- Rilegatura
- Brossura
- Lingua
- inglese
- ISBN 10
- 1634596234
- ISBN 13
- 9781634596237
This 9th edition of Constitutional Law in a Nutshell summarizes constitutional law from Marbury v. Madison (1803) to the present. This edition features some new and controversial cases. A new and famous example is Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) which held, per Justice Kennedy, 5-4, that under both the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment same sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States. In Fisher v. University of Texas (2016) the Court held, 4-3, per Justice Kennedy, that the much litigated, race-conscious admissions program of the University of Texas was valid under the Equal Protection Clause. In the area of a womans right to decide to have an abortion, the Court in Whole Womens Health v. Hellerstedt (2016) upheld, 5-2, the use of rigorous undue burden standard as the measure of the abortion right. The Court ruled that two provisions of a Texas law targeting the states abortion clinics were unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. The First Amendment, as always, continues to generate new and important decisions. Thus, Reed v. Gilbert (2015) held that a town sign ordinance violated the First Amendment. The court indicated that any speech regulation directed to a specific subject matter should be evaluated under the strict scrutiny standard. The decision leaves open a question as to whether this ruling is intended to be applied to previously less protected categories of expression. This edition, of course, contains numerous other important decisions. The objective is to summarize the essence of the Court decisions and to do so in a concise and understandable way.
"Riassunto" può appartenere a un’altra edizione di questo titolo.