Doing Justice In The Peoples Courts

Presents research findings on city courts and their processing of misdemeanors, illuminating the conditions under which bias is maximized and minimized in the lower courts.

Presents research findings on city courts and their processing of misdemeanors, illuminating the conditions under which bias is maximized and minimized in the lower courts.

In Appeal to the People’s Court: Rethinking Law, Judging, and Punishment, Vincent Luizzi turns to the goings on in courts at the lowest level of adjudication for fresh insights for rethinking these basic features of the legal order. In the pragmatic tradition of turning from fixed and unchanging conceptions, the work rejects the view of law as a set of black and white rules, of judging as the mechanical application of law to facts, and of punishment as a necessary, punitive response to crime. The author, a municipal judge and philosophy professor, joins theory and practice to feature the citizen in rethinking these institutions. The work includes a foreword by Richard Hull, special Guest Editor for this volume in Studies in Jurisprudence.

*A New York Times Bestseller* An important overview of the way our justice system works, and why the rule of law is essential to our survival as a society—from the one-time federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York, and host of the Doing Justice podcast. Preet Bharara has spent much of his life examining our legal system, pushing to make it better, and prosecuting those looking to subvert it. Bharara believes in our system and knows it must be protected, but to do so, he argues, we must also acknowledge and allow for flaws both in our justice system and in human nature. Bharara uses the many illustrative anecdotes and case histories from his storied, formidable career—the successes as well as the failures—to shed light on the realities of the legal system and the consequences of taking action. Inspiring and inspiringly written, Doing Justice gives us hope that rational and objective fact-based thinking, combined with compassion, can help us achieve truth and justice in our daily lives. Sometimes poignant and sometimes controversial, Bharara's expose is a thought-provoking, entertaining book about the need to find the humanity in our legal system as well as in our society.

In the United States, almost 90 percent of state judges have to run in popular elections to remain on the bench. In the past decade, this peculiarly American institution has produced vicious multi-million-dollar political election campaigns and high-profile allegations of judicial bias and misconduct. The People’s Courts traces the history of judicial elections and Americans’ quest for an independent judiciary—one that would ensure fairness for all before the law—from the colonial era to the present. In the aftermath of economic disaster, nineteenth-century reformers embraced popular elections as a way to make politically appointed judges less susceptible to partisan patronage and more independent of the legislative and executive branches of government. This effort to reinforce the separation of powers and limit government succeeded in many ways, but it created new threats to judicial independence and provoked further calls for reform. Merit selection emerged as the most promising means of reducing partisan and financial influence from judicial selection. It too, however, proved vulnerable to pressure from party politics and special interest groups. Yet, as Shugerman concludes, it still has more potential for protecting judicial independence than either political appointment or popular election. The People’s Courts shows how Americans have been deeply committed to judicial independence, but that commitment has also been manipulated by special interests. By understanding our history of judicial selection, we can better protect and preserve the independence of judges from political and partisan influence.

This book explores the recent development of the Supreme People’s Court of China, the world’s largest highest court. Recognizing that its approach to exercising power in an authoritarian context has presented a challenge to the understanding of judicial power in both democratic and non-democratic legal settings, it captures the essence of the Court through its institutional design as well as functional practice. It argues that regardless of the deep-seated political and institutional constraints, the Court has demonstrated a highly pragmatic interest in fulfilling its primary functions and prudently expanding judicial power in the context of reform-era China. This notwithstanding, it also discusses how the Court’s incompetence and reluctance to challenge the bureaucratism and politicization suggests that the call for an impartial and authoritative judicial power will continue to be jeopardized while the Court operates in the shadow of Party authority and lacks meaningful checks and balances. Drawing on the experience of the Court, this book reflects on some deep-rooted misunderstandings of legal development in China, providing a source of inspiration for reconceptualizing the internal logic of a distinct category of judicial power.

"This book is an updated and expanded study of the manner in which the Supreme Court of Israel has related to petitions challenging actions of the Israeli authorities in the territories occupied by Israel during the 1967 War. The first edition of the study was published two decades ago by one of the present authors, David Kretzmer. The original work was completed just before the second intifida began in September 2000. It covered decisions of the Supreme Court both during the formative years of the Court's jurisprudence on the occupation, and during the first intifada that broke out in December 1987. As stated in the preface to the first edition, the beginning of the second intifada proved that the hopes that the historic Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO (1993-1995) would lead to peace between Israel and the Palestinians and to the end of the occupation were premature. At the present time (2020) an end to direct Israeli control over the West Bank and restrictions on life in Gaza does not seem to be in sight. The so-called peace plan published by the Trump Administration in February 2020, as we were completing the manuscript, does not alter that picture, although it may contribute to changes in the regime in the West Bank. Much that has happened since the first edition was published has affected the type of cases that reach the Supreme Court, and consequently the topics covered in this study. After a wave of suicide bombings in Israel in 2001 and 2002 the IDF embarked on a military operation in the West Bank. This operation and subsequent hostilities between the IDF and armed Palestinian groups yielded a host of petitions relating to means and methods of warfare and to judicial review during active hostilities. In 2002 the Israeli government began the construction of a separation barrier in the West Bank, the declared purpose of which was to make it more difficult for potential Palestinian terrorists to enter Israel itself. The barrier's route not only spurred close to two hundred petitions to the Supreme Court; it was also the subject of an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice. In August 2005 Israel withdrew its armed forces and civilian settlements from the Gaza Strip under the Disengagement Plan, and the government announced that Israel no longer had responsibility for Gaza. Controversy arose whether Gaza remained occupied territory. In 2006 the Hamas movement gained control over Gaza and the Government of Israel declared Gaza to be 'hostile territory.' The relations between Israel and Gaza have been tense ever since, with firing of rockets and bombs on Israeli towns and villages, severe restrictions on supply of goods to Gaza and movement of people between Gaza and the West Bank, and periods of active hostilities between Israel and Gaza. Since the first edition of this study was completed there has been a dramatic expansion in the number of Israeli settlements and settlers in the West Bank. This expansion has had various legal and practical consequences, including the emergence of two different legal regimes applicable to Israelis and to Palestinians resident in the West Bank"--

It is often assumed that the law and religion address different spheres of human life. Religion and ethics articulate complex systems of moral reasoning that concern norms, deliberation of ends, cultivation of disposition, and transformation of moral agency. Law, in contrast, seeks to govern human conduct through procedural justice, rights, and public good. Doing Justice to Mercy challenges this assumption by presenting the reader with an urgent conversation between the law and religion that yields a constructive approach, both theoretically and practically, to the complex role of mercy in our legal process. Authored by legal practitioners, activists, and theorists in addition to theologians and ethicists, the essays collected here are informed by timeless principles, and yet they could not be timelier. The trend in sentencing moves toward an increased severity, and the number of incarcerated people in the United States is at an all-time high. In the half-decade since 9/11, moreover, homeland security has established itself as a permanent fixture in our lives. In this atmosphere, the current volume seeks initially to clarify how justice and mercy intertwine in relation to a number of issues, such as rehabilitation, the death penalty, domestic violence, and war crimes. Exploring the legal, philosophical, and theological grounds for mercy in our courts, the discussion then moves to the practical ways in which mercy may be implemented. Contributors:Marc Mauer, The Sentencing Project * Lois Gehr Livezey, McCormick Theological Seminary * Ernie Lewis, Public Advocate, Commonwealth of Kentucky * Jonathan Rothchild, Loyola Marymount University * Albert W. Alschuler, Northwestern University School of Law * David Scheffer, Northwestern University School of Law * David Little, Harvard Divinity School * Matthew Myer Boulton, Andover Newton Theological School * Mark Lewis Taylor, Princeton Theological Seminary * Sarah Coakley, Cambridge University * William Schweiker, University of Chicago Divinity School * Kevin Jung, College of William and Mary * Peter J. Paris, Princeton Theological Seminary * W. Clark Gilpin, University of Chicago Divinity School * William C. Placher, Wabash College

Winner of the 2017 Eduardo Bonilla-Silva Outstanding Book Award, sponsored by the Society for the Study of Social Problems. Finalist for the C. Wright Mills Book Award, sponsored by the Society for the Study of Social Problems. Winner of the 2017 Oliver Cromwell Cox Book Award, sponsored by the American Sociological Association's Section on Racial and Ethnic Minorities. Winner of the 2017 Mary Douglas Prize for Best Book, sponsored by the American Sociological Association's Sociology of Culture Section. Honorable Mention in the 2017 Book Award from the American Sociological Association's Section on Race, Class, and Gender. NAACP Image Award Nominee for an Outstanding Literary Work from a debut author. Winner of the 2017 Prose Award for Excellence in Social Sciences and the 2017 Prose Category Award for Law and Legal Studies, sponsored by the Professional and Scholarly Publishing Division, Association of American Publishers. Silver Medal from the Independent Publisher Book Awards (Current Events/Social Issues category). Americans are slowly waking up to the dire effects of racial profiling, police brutality, and mass incarceration, especially in disadvantaged neighborhoods and communities of color. The criminal courts are the crucial gateway between police action on the street and the processing of primarily black and Latino defendants into jails and prisons. And yet the courts, often portrayed as sacred, impartial institutions, have remained shrouded in secrecy, with the majority of Americans kept in the dark about how they function internally. Crook County bursts open the courthouse doors and enters the hallways, courtrooms, judges' chambers, and attorneys' offices to reveal a world of punishment determined by race, not offense. Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve spent ten years working in and investigating the largest criminal courthouse in the country, Chicago–Cook County, and based on over 1,000 hours of observation, she takes readers inside our so-called halls of justice to witness the types of everyday racial abuses that fester within the courts, often in plain sight. We watch white courtroom professionals classify and deliberate on the fates of mostly black and Latino defendants while racial abuse and due process violations are encouraged and even seen as justified. Judges fall asleep on the bench. Prosecutors hang out like frat boys in the judges' chambers while the fates of defendants hang in the balance. Public defenders make choices about which defendants they will try to "save" and which they will sacrifice. Sheriff's officers cruelly mock and abuse defendants' family members. Delve deeper into Crook County with related media and instructor resources at www.sup.org/crookcountyresources. Crook County's powerful and at times devastating narratives reveal startling truths about a legal culture steeped in racial abuse. Defendants find themselves thrust into a pernicious legal world where courtroom actors live and breathe racism while simultaneously committing themselves to a colorblind ideal. Gonzalez Van Cleve urges all citizens to take a closer look at the way we do justice in America and to hold our arbiters of justice accountable to the highest standards of equality.