000			02880nam a22002777a 4500
999			_c5945 _d5945
003			TZ-ArACH
005			20200904161720.0
008			200904b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
020			_a9780307741325
040			_cTZ-ArACH
050			_aKF8748 .U76 _b2017.
100			_aUrofsky, Melvin I.
245			_aDissent and the Supreme Court : _bits role in the Court's history and the nation's constitutional dialogue / _cMelvin I. Urofsky.
260			_aNew York : _bVintage Books, _c2017.
300			_a528 pages : _billustrations ; _c21 cm
501			_aIncludes bibliographical references (pages 429-488) and indexes.
505			_aDissent and the constitutional dialogue -- From seriatim to the opinion of the court -- From Marshall to Dred Scott -- Field, Slaughterhouse, and Munn -- John Marshall Harlan : the first great dissenter -- Mis-en-scène 1 : Harlan and Holmes in Lochner v. New York (1905) -- Holmes and Brandeis dissenting -- Mis-en-scène 2 : Brandeis in Olmstead v. United States (1928) -- The return of seriatim -- The prima donnas I : personalities and issues of wartime -- Mis-en-scène 3 : Wiley Rutledge and In re Yamashita (1946) -- The prima donnas II : incorporation, criminal procedure, and free speech -- Mis-en-scène 4 : Black in Betts v. Brady (1942) -- Lower federal courts, the states, and foreign tribunals -- Continuing themes, from Warren to Roberts -- Mis-en-scène 5 : Marshall, Brennan, and capital punishment -- Coda.
520			_a"In his major work, acclaimed historian and judicial authority Melvin Urofsky examines the great dissents throughout the Court's long history. Constitutional dialogue is one of the ways in which we as a people reinvent and reinvigorate our democratic society. The Supreme Court has interpreted the meaning of the Constitution, acknowledged that the Court's majority opinions have not always been right, and initiated a critical discourse about what a particular decision should mean and fashioning subsequent decisions-largely through the power of dissent. Urofsky shows how the practice grew slowly but steadily, beginning with the infamous & now overturned case of Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) during which Chief Justice Roger Taney's opinion upheld slaver and ending with the present age of incivility, in which reasoned dialogue seems less and less possible. Dissent on the court and off, Urofsky argues in this major work, has been a crucial ingredient in keeping the Constitution alive and must continue to be so." $c --publisher's description.
610			_aUnited States. _bSupreme Court.
650			_aDissenting opinions _zUnited States.
650			_aDissenters _xLegal status, laws, etc. _zUnited States.
650			_aJudicial opinions _zUnited States.
650			_aConstitutional law _zUnited States.
650			_aGovernment, Resistance to _zUnited States.
942			_2lcc _cBOOK