Description

Book Synopsis


Trade Review
DiPaolo (Middle Tennessee State Univ.) examines how federal courts rule when the national government has limited individual liberties during times of national emergency. Using Justice Robert Jackson's Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952) framework ina case law-based analysis, DiPaolo observes that in cases in which the president justifies his actions by claiming national security concerns, the federal courts will often opt not to rule on the larger constitutional issues at stake. Rather, they will evaluate the president's actions based on whether or not Congress has legislated. This 'separation of powers' approach, she suggests, protects the courts from bowing to the pressures of the moment and making a mistake that will, in the long run, weaken thejudiciary and the Constitution itself. DiPaolo's very thorough...case retellings are helpfully summarized by various tables that classify the decisions based on whether or not the court agreed with the chief executive's decision, and whether or not Congress had legislated in the particular subject area. Recommended. * CHOICE, September 2010 *
DiPaolo (Middle Tennessee State Univ.) examines how federal courts rule when the national government has limited individual liberties during times of national emergency. Using Justice Robert Jackson's Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952) framework in a case law-based analysis, DiPaolo observes that in cases in which the president justifies his actions by claiming national security concerns, the federal courts will often opt not to rule on the larger constitutional issues at stake. Rather, they will evaluate the president's actions based on whether or not Congress has legislated. This 'separation of powers' approach, she suggests, protects the courts from bowing to the pressures of the moment and making a mistake that will, in the long run, weaken the judiciary and the Constitution itself. DiPaolo's very thorough...case retellings are helpfully summarized by various tables that classify the decisions based on whether or not the court agreed with the chief executive's decision, and whether or not Congress had legislated in the particular subject area. Recommended. * CHOICE, September 2010 *

Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. Guiding War Powers Judicial Decision Making Chapter 3. Military Detentions Chapter 4. Warrantless Electronic Surveillance Chapter 5. Economic Property Rights Chapter 6. Free Speech

Zones of Twilight

    Product form

    £91.80

    Includes FREE delivery

    RRP £102.00 – you save £10.20 (10%)

    Order before 4pm tomorrow for delivery by Tue 23 Jun 2026.

    A Hardback by Amanda DiPaolo

    Out of stock


      View other formats and editions of Zones of Twilight by Amanda DiPaolo

      Publisher: Lexington Books
      Publication Date: 12/22/2009 12:00:00 AM
      ISBN13: 9780739138335, 978-0739138335
      ISBN10: 0739138332

      Description

      Book Synopsis


      Trade Review
      DiPaolo (Middle Tennessee State Univ.) examines how federal courts rule when the national government has limited individual liberties during times of national emergency. Using Justice Robert Jackson's Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952) framework ina case law-based analysis, DiPaolo observes that in cases in which the president justifies his actions by claiming national security concerns, the federal courts will often opt not to rule on the larger constitutional issues at stake. Rather, they will evaluate the president's actions based on whether or not Congress has legislated. This 'separation of powers' approach, she suggests, protects the courts from bowing to the pressures of the moment and making a mistake that will, in the long run, weaken thejudiciary and the Constitution itself. DiPaolo's very thorough...case retellings are helpfully summarized by various tables that classify the decisions based on whether or not the court agreed with the chief executive's decision, and whether or not Congress had legislated in the particular subject area. Recommended. * CHOICE, September 2010 *
      DiPaolo (Middle Tennessee State Univ.) examines how federal courts rule when the national government has limited individual liberties during times of national emergency. Using Justice Robert Jackson's Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952) framework in a case law-based analysis, DiPaolo observes that in cases in which the president justifies his actions by claiming national security concerns, the federal courts will often opt not to rule on the larger constitutional issues at stake. Rather, they will evaluate the president's actions based on whether or not Congress has legislated. This 'separation of powers' approach, she suggests, protects the courts from bowing to the pressures of the moment and making a mistake that will, in the long run, weaken the judiciary and the Constitution itself. DiPaolo's very thorough...case retellings are helpfully summarized by various tables that classify the decisions based on whether or not the court agreed with the chief executive's decision, and whether or not Congress had legislated in the particular subject area. Recommended. * CHOICE, September 2010 *

      Table of Contents
      Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. Guiding War Powers Judicial Decision Making Chapter 3. Military Detentions Chapter 4. Warrantless Electronic Surveillance Chapter 5. Economic Property Rights Chapter 6. Free Speech

      Recently viewed products

      © 2026 Book Curl

        • American Express
        • Apple Pay
        • Diners Club
        • Discover
        • Google Pay
        • Maestro
        • Mastercard
        • PayPal
        • Shop Pay
        • Union Pay
        • Visa

        Login

        Forgot your password?

        Don't have an account yet?
        Create account