検索キーワード： 司法制度

A growing chorus of officials and commentators argues that the Supreme Court has become too political. On this view, the confirmation process is just an exercise in partisan agenda-setting, and the jurists are no more than “politicians in robes” - their ostensibly neutral judicial philosophies mere camouflage for conservative or liberal convictions.

Presumed Guilty reveals how the Supreme Court allows the perpetuation of racist policing by presuming that suspects, especially people of color, are guilty.

Riforma giustizia, lavori in corso: Giustizia, trattativa in salita coi Cinquestelle. Il voto sulla riforma prima delle ferie e Draghi pensa alla fiducia, di Tommaso Ciriaco; Giustizia, la riforma slitta: gelo tra Cartabia e M5S. Torna l'ipotesi fiducia, di Tommaso Ciriaco e Liana Milella; Riforma della giustizia, il governo chiede il voto fiducia: "Evitiamo zone di impunità", di Liana Milella; Giustizia, Draghi congela la trattativa. Tensione tra i 5 Stelle, di Tommaso Ciriaco e Liana Milella.

The prevalence of sex crimes has become one of the most urgent and most widely misunderstood subjects of our times. We are living through a sea change in our attitudes to sex crimes, yet we continue to get things badly wrong in the way we respond to them. Drawing on over 30 years' experience, Patrick Tidmarsh argues that we need to find a new way to understand, investigate and talk about these crimes. He forces us all to question our own prejudices and assumptions - about both victims and perpetrators.

The concept of habeas corpus - literally, to receive and hold the body - empowers courts to protect the right of prisoners to know the basis on which they are being held by the government and grant prisoners their freedom when they are held unlawfully. It is no wonder that habeas corpus has long been considered essential to freedom.

Nomine, spartizioni, accordi sottobanco fra le correnti. Tutto avvilente, per carità. Ma c'è ben altro, ben altre infezioni, nel corpo malato della corporazione togata. Comportamenti e azioni davanti a cui si resta interdetti e si fatica a trovare parole adeguate. Ci sono giudici che hanno depositato sentenze con mesi e mesi di ritardo e altri che hanno dimenticato in cella gli imputati per 51 giorni. Ci sono giudici che hanno chiamato i carabinieri per non pagare il conto al ristorante e altri che hanno smarrito pratiche e fascicoli, vanificando anni di processi.

Ottobre 2020: per la prima volta nella storia della magistratura un ex membro del Csm viene radiato dall'ordine giudiziario. Chi è Luca Palamara? Una carriera brillante avviata con la presidenza dell'Associazione nazionale magistrati a trentanove anni. A quarantacinque viene eletto nel Consiglio superiore della magistratura e, alla guida della corrente di centro, Unità per la Costituzione, contribuisce a determinare le decisioni dell'organo di autogoverno dei giudici.

"Vom alltäglichen Scheitern" erzählt aus dem Leben eines Gerichtsreporters an einem ganz gewöhnlichen Amtsgericht. Die Kriminalfälle, die dort verhandelt werden, finden maximal eine Erwähnung in der Lokalzeitung, denn hier geht es nicht um Mord und Totschlag oder milliardenschwere Unterschlagungen, hier geht es um menschliche Schicksale - auf Seiten der Opfer, auf Seiten der Täter. Es sind die "kleinen Geschichten", die dieses Hörbuch anschaulich, unterhaltsam wie informativ schildert, Geschichten, die aufrühren, zornig wie traurig aber auch nachdenklich machen.

Ian Millhiser, Vox's Supreme Court correspondent, tells the story of what the six very conservative Republicans Supreme Court justices are likely to do with their power. The Agenda exposes a radically altered Supreme Court whose powers extend far beyond transforming any individual right - its agenda is to shape the very nature of America's government, redefining who gets to have legal rights, who is beyond the reach of the law, and who chooses the people who make our laws.

When two parties meet in court, the outcome is rarely preordained. Judges must figure out who wins and who loses by analyzing the facts of the case before them and applying the legal principles of cases that have come before. How Would You Rule? brings that experience alive by presenting you with the critical facts and rules in 31 of the law's most interesting cases and inviting you to test your legal wits and sharpen your legal judgment by figuring out how these challenging cases should be decided.

If you can imagine it, somewhere there’s probably a law against it. Laugh out loud over some of Canada’s strangest laws - but not too loudly, or you might get a ticket: until 2002 in BC, you couldn’t stand up while having a drink in a restaurant; in Halifax, cabbies are required to wear socks; you’re not allowed to dogsled on the sidewalks in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario; and much more.

America's criminal justice system is among the deadliest and most racist in the world and it disproportionally targets Black Americans, who are also disproportionately poor, hungry, houseless, jobless, sick, and poorly educated. By every metric of misery, this nation does not act like Black Lives Matter. In order to break out of the trap of racialized mass incarceration and relentless racial oppression, we, as a society, need to rethink our basic assumptions about blame and punishment.

Hay historias que mejoran con el tiempo. Sobre todo si suceden en Italia, porque allí las ondas expansivas de las investigaciones judiciales son interestelares: rascas un poco y aparecen conspiraciones de película de serie B en las que no falta ningún elemento, desde grupos terroristas a tramas vaticanas. Parece muy sofisticado, pero no se engañen: la mafia es una fábula estúpida sin ningún glamour.

In One Vote Away, you will discover how often the high court decisions that affect your life have been decided by just one vote. One vote preserves your right to speak freely, to bear arms, and to exercise your faith. One vote will determine whether your children enjoy their full inheritance as American citizens.

One promise of democracy is the right of every citizen to vote. And yet, from our founding, strong political forces were determined to limit that right. The Supreme Court, Alexander Hamilton wrote, would protect the weak against this very sort of tyranny. Still, as On Account of Race forcefully demonstrates, through the better part of American history the Court has instead been a protector of white rule. And complex threats against the right to vote persist even today.

The Indian Penal Code was formulated in 1860, three years after the first Indian revolt for independence. But it was only in 1870 that Section 124A was slipped into Chapter VI, defining the offense of Sedition in a statute for the first time in the history of common law. When India became independent in 1947, the Constituent Assembly expressed strong reservations against sedition as a restriction on free speech as it had been used as a weapon against freedom fighters, many of whom were a part of the Assembly. And yet it has survived....

Indu Bhan’s Legal Eagles: Stories of Top Seven Indian Lawyers’ traces the story of the top seven lawyers in India. Lawyers, as we commonly perceive, are not just shrewd intellectuals but much more. It takes more than just intelligence to become a successful lawyer. It takes years of practice, extensive studies and professionalism which set the absolutely outstanding lawyers from the general ones. Their life and career graph is full of crusts and troughs and this book gives an insight into it.

The Mueller Report was a catastrophe for the malevolent forces desperate to impeach President Donald Trump. It failed to prove any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Since then, many of the President's former advisors and associates have been subjected to vindictive, political prosecutions for a variety of trivial, unrelated offenses. Roger Stone is one of them. In this moving, eyewitness account of Stone's trial and his decades-long career of political chicanery, author and Stone intimate Milo Yiannopoulos introduces America to the man behind the myth.

This is the cut-to-the-chase quality that makes economics not only applicable to the interpretation of law, but beneficial to its crafting. Drawing on numerous commonsense examples, in addition to his extensive knowledge of Chicago-school economics, David D. Friedman offers a spirited defense of the economic view of law. He clarifies the relationship between law and economics in clear prose that is friendly to students, lawyers, and lay listeners without sacrificing the intellectual heft of the ideas presented.

In 1981, after almost two centuries of exclusively male appointments, Sandra Day O'Connor became the first female Supreme Court Justice of the United States, a significant historical moment and a symbolic triumph for supporters of women's rights. Most do not know, however, about the remarkable women shortlisted for the Supreme Court in the decades before O'Connor's success. Since the 1930s, nine women were formally considered for a seat on the Supreme Court, but were ultimately passed over. Shortlisted gives them the recognition they deserve.