Sunstein casts new light on freedom of speech, showing that a free society not only forbids censorship but also provides public spaces for dissenters to expose widely held myths and pervasive injustices. He provides evidence about the effects of conformity and dissent on the federal courts. The evidence shows not only that Republican appointees vote differently from Democratic appointees but also that both Republican and Democratic judges are likely to go to extremes if unchecked by opposing views. Understanding the need for dissent illuminates countless social debates, including those over affirmative action in higher education, because diversity is indispensable to learning.
Dissenters are often portrayed as selfish and disloyal, but Sunstein shows that those who reject pressures imposed by others perform valuable social functions, often at their own expense. This is true for dissenters in boardrooms, churches, unions, and academia. It is true for dissenters in the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court. And it is true during times of war and peace.
]]>Though they claim a devotion to history, Sunstein believes fundamentalists are "seeking to produce a federal judiciary that operates as an arm of the political branches." In making this point, Sunstein shows how "judicial activism" by extreme conservative judges has been on the rise since the Reagan administration, moving the Supreme Court hard to the right in the process. He discusses the implications of this shift on issues such as the right to privacy, marriage, affirmative action, national security, the separation of powers, gun control, and religion in public life, among others. In Radicals in Robes, Sunstein skillfully outlines complex constitutional issues in clear language, making this a useful and thought-provoking book for lay readers and legal experts alike. --Shawn Carkonen
]]>"Engaging, thoughtful and original." (San Francisco Chronicle)
"Spirited and perfectly conceived." (Washington Post Book World)
"An ingenious argument." (New York Times Book Review)
]]>This collection of essays on constitutional law is designed to introduce the reader to the range of issues concerning constitutional theory that occupy the attention of constitutional scholars in the United States today.
]]>Now, in Republic.com 2.0, Sunstein thoroughly rethinks the critical relationship between democracy and the Internet in a world where partisan Web logs have emerged as a significant force in politics and where cyber-jihadists have embraced the Internet to thwart democracy and spread violence.
Emphasizing the value of unplanned, unchosen encounters, the original Republic.com provoked a strong reaction from cyber-optimists. In Republic.com 2.0 Sunstein answers the critics and expands his argument to take account of new developments, including the blogosphere, and fresh evidence about how people are using the Internet. He demonstrates that the real question is how to avoid "information cocoons" and to ensure that the unrestricted choices made possible by technology do not undermine democracy. Sunstein also proposes new remedies and reforms--focusing far less on what government should do, and much more on what consumers and producers should do--to help democracy avoid the perils, and realize the promise, of the Internet.
]]>As it is currently interpreted, the Constitution is partial, Sunstein asserts. It is, first of all, biased. Contemporary constitutional law treats the status quo as neutral and just, and any departure as necessarily partisan. But when the status quo is neither neutral nor just, Sunstein argues, reasoning of this sort produces injustice. The Constitution is also partial in another sense: its meaning has come to be identified solely with the decisions of the Supreme Court. This was not always the case, as Sunstein demonstrates; nor was it the intention of the country's founders. Instead, the Constitution often served as a catalyst for public deliberation about its general terms and aspirations--and Sunstein makes a strong case for reviving this broader understanding of the Constitution's role.
In light of this analysis, Sunstein proposes solutions to some of the most hotly disputed issues of our time, including affirmative action, sex discrimination, pornography, "hate speech," and government funding of religious schools and the arts. In an especially striking argument, he claims that the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment--not the right to privacy--protects a woman's right to choose abortion. Sunstein connects these and other debates to the Constitution's historic commitment to public deliberation among political equalsand in doing so, he reconceives many of our most basic constitutional rights, such as free speech and equality under law. He urges that public deliberation about the meaning of the Constitution in turn be freed from a principle of neutrality based on the status quo. His work points to a historically sound but fundamentally new understanding of the American constitutional process as an exercise in deliberative democracy.
]]>Cass Sunstein explores these and other worst-case scenarios and how we might best prevent them in this vivid, illuminating, and highly original analysis. Singling out the problems of terrorism and climate change, Sunstein explores our susceptibility to two opposite and unhelpful reactions: panic and utter neglect. He shows how private individuals and public officials might best respond to low-probability risks of disaster--emphasizing the need to know what we will lose from precautions as well as from inaction. Finally, he offers an understanding of the uses and limits of cost-benefit analysis, especially when current generations are imposing risks on future generations.
Throughout, Sunstein uses climate change as a defining case, because it dramatically illustrates the underlying principles. But he also discusses terrorism, depletion of the ozone layer, genetic modification of food, hurricanes, and worst-case scenarios faced in our ordinary lives. Sunstein concludes that if we can avoid the twin dangers of over-reaction and apathy, we will be able to ameliorate if not avoid future catastrophes, retaining our sanity as well as scarce resources that can be devoted to more constructive ends.
]]> This is an important book. Beautifully clear and carefully argued, Sunstein's contribution reaches well beyond the confines of academic debate. It will be of interest to any citizen concerned about freedom of speech and the current state of American democracy. --
Joshua Cohen, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
How can our constitutional protection of free speech serve to strengthen democracy? Cass Sunstein challenges conventional answers with a remarkable array of lucid arguments and legal examples. There is no better book on the subject. --
Amy Gutmann, Laurance S. Rockefeller University Professor, Princeton University
Exploring hot-button issues ranging from presidential power to same-sex relations to gun rights, Sunstein shows how the meaning of the Constitution is reestablished in every generation as new social commitments and ideas compel us to reassess our fundamental beliefs. He focuses on three approaches to the Constitution--traditionalism, which grounds the document's meaning in long-standing social practices, not necessarily in the views of the founding generation; populism, which insists that judges should respect contemporary public opinion; and cosmopolitanism, which looks at how foreign courts address constitutional questions, and which suggests that the meaning of the Constitution turns on what other nations do.
Sunstein demonstrates that in all three contexts a "many minds" argument is at work--put simply, better decisions result when many points of view are considered. He makes sense of the intense debates surrounding these approaches, revealing their strengths and weaknesses, and sketches the contexts in which each provides a legitimate basis for interpreting the Constitution today.
This book illuminates the underpinnings of constitutionalism itself, and shows that ours is indeed a Constitution, not of any particular generation, but of many minds.
]]>
Featured in the Third Edition:
An up-to-date, in-depth, and cogent treatment of First Amendment issues, with a 75/25 split in coverage between speech and religion;
A balance of historical, theoretical, and practical approaches;
The highly regarded authorship of the very successful casebook, Constitutional Law, Fifth Edition;
Numerous well-crafted problems with which students can practice applying legal principles in hypothetical situations.
New to the Third Edition:
Major new cases;
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union on the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA);
Virginia v. Black on content-based restrictions on freedom of expression;
U.S. v. American Library Association and Randall v. Sorrell on content-neutral restrictions;
Eldred v. Ashcroft on freedom of the press and the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA);
New materials on the Establishment clause and the Free Exercise clause;
Updated notes on recent scholarship concerning free speech and the religion clauses.
Whether you use First Amendment, Third Edition, as a stand-alone text in a First Amendment elective, or as a supplement in a Constitutional Law course, this outstanding author team will illuminate your coverage of First Amendment topics with their passion and erudition.
Sunstein vigorously defends government regulation against Reaganite/Thatcherite attacks based on free-market economics and pre-New Deal principles of private right. Focusing on the important interests in clean air and water, a safe workplace, access to the air waves, and protection against discrimination, he shows that regulatory initiatives have proved far superior to an approach that relies solely on private enterprise. Sunstein grants that some regulatory regimes have failed and calls for reforms that would amount to an American perestroika: a restructuring that embraces the use of government to further democratic goals but that insists on the decentralization and productive potential of private markets.
Sunstein also proposes a theory of interpretation that courts and administrative agencies could use to secure constitutional goals and to improve the operation of regulatory programs. From this theory he seeks to develop a set of principles that would synthesize the modern regulatory state with the basic premises of the American constitutional system. Teachers of law, policymakers and political scientists, economists and historians, and a general audience interested in rights, regulation, and government will find this book an essential addition to their libraries.
]]>One of America's preeminent constitutional scholars, Sunstein mounts a defense of the most striking characteristic of modern constitutional law: the inclination to decide one case at a time. Examining various controversies, he shows how--and why--the Court has avoided broad rulings on issues from the legitimacy of affirmative action to the "right to die," and in doing so has fostered rather than foreclosed public debate on these difficult topics. He offers an original perspective on the right of free speech and the many novel questions raised by Congress's efforts to regulate violent and sexual materials on new media such as the Internet and cable television. And on the relationship between the Constitution and homosexuality and sex discrimination, he reveals how the Court has tried to ensure against second-class citizenship--and the public expression of contempt for anyone--while leaving a degree of flexibility to the political process.
One Case at a Time also lays out, and celebrates, the remarkable constellation of rights--involving both liberty and equality--that now commands a consensus in American law. An authoritative guide to the Supreme Court, the book offers a new understanding of the American Constitution, and of the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism, and between rights and self-government.
]]>Republic.com 2.0 highlights new research on how people are using the Internet, especially the blogosphere. Sunstein warns against "information cocoons" and "echo chambers," wherein people avoid the news and opinions that they don't want to hear. He also demonstrates the need to regulate the innumerable choices made possible by technology. His proposed remedies and reforms emphasize what consumers and producers can do to help avoid the perils, and realize the promise, of the Internet.
]]>Nuclear bombs in suitcases, anthrax bacilli in ventilators, tsunamis and meteors, avian flu, scorchingly hot temperatures: nightmares that were once the plot of Hollywood movies are now frighteningly real possibilities. How can we steer a path between willful inaction and reckless overreaction?
Cass Sunstein explores these and other worst-case scenarios and how we might best prevent them in this vivid, illuminating, and highly original analysis. Singling out the problems of terrorism and climate change, Sunstein explores our susceptibility to two opposite and unhelpful reactions: panic and utter neglect. He shows how private individuals and public officials might best respond to low-probability risks of disaster--emphasizing the need to know what we will lose from precautions as well as from inaction. Finally, he offers an understanding of the uses and limits of cost-benefit analysis, especially when current generations are imposing risks on future generations.
Throughout, Sunstein uses climate change as a defining case, because it dramatically illustrates the underlying principles. But he also discusses terrorism, depletion of the ozone layer, genetic modification of food, hurricanes, and worst-case scenarios faced in our ordinary lives. Sunstein concludes that if we can avoid the twin dangers of over-reaction and apathy, we will be able to ameliorate if not avoid future catastrophes, retaining our sanity as well as scarce resources that can be devoted to more constructive ends.
(20080202)]]>Sunstein vigorously defends government regulation against Reaganite/Thatcherite attacks based on free-market economics and pre-New Deal principles of private right. Focusing on the important interests in clean air and water, a safe workplace, access to the air waves, and protection against discrimination, he shows that regulatory initiatives have proved far superior to an approach that relies solely on private enterprise. Sunstein grants that some regulatory regimes have failed and calls for reforms that would amount to an American perestroika: a restructuring that embraces the use of government to further democratic goals but that insists on the decentralization and productive potential of private markets.
Sunstein also proposes a theory of interpretation that courts and administrative agencies could use to secure constitutional goals and to improve the operation of regulatory programs. From this theory he seeks to develop a set of principles that would synthesize the modern regulatory state with the basic premises of the American constitutional system. Teachers of law, policymakers and political scientists, economists and historians, and a general audience interested in rights, regulation, and government will find this book an essential addition to their libraries.
]]>Republic.com 2.0 highlights new research on how people are using the Internet, especially the blogosphere. Sunstein warns against "information cocoons" and "echo chambers," wherein people avoid the news and opinions that they don't want to hear. He also demonstrates the need to regulate the innumerable choices made possible by technology. His proposed remedies and reforms emphasize what consumers and producers can do to help avoid the perils, and realize the promise, of the Internet.
]]>Nuclear bombs in suitcases, anthrax bacilli in ventilators, tsunamis and meteors, avian flu, scorchingly hot temperatures: nightmares that were once the plot of Hollywood movies are now frighteningly real possibilities. How can we steer a path between willful inaction and reckless overreaction?
Cass Sunstein explores these and other worst-case scenarios and how we might best prevent them in this vivid, illuminating, and highly original analysis. Singling out the problems of terrorism and climate change, Sunstein explores our susceptibility to two opposite and unhelpful reactions: panic and utter neglect. He shows how private individuals and public officials might best respond to low-probability risks of disaster--emphasizing the need to know what we will lose from precautions as well as from inaction. Finally, he offers an understanding of the uses and limits of cost-benefit analysis, especially when current generations are imposing risks on future generations.
Throughout, Sunstein uses climate change as a defining case, because it dramatically illustrates the underlying principles. But he also discusses terrorism, depletion of the ozone layer, genetic modification of food, hurricanes, and worst-case scenarios faced in our ordinary lives. Sunstein concludes that if we can avoid the twin dangers of over-reaction and apathy, we will be able to ameliorate if not avoid future catastrophes, retaining our sanity as well as scarce resources that can be devoted to more constructive ends.
(20080202)]]>This collection of essays on constitutional law is designed to introduce the reader to the range of issues concerning constitutional theory that occupy the attention of constitutional scholars in the United States today.
]]>
Featured in the Third Edition:
An up-to-date, in-depth, and cogent treatment of First Amendment issues, with a 75/25 split in coverage between speech and religion;
A balance of historical, theoretical, and practical approaches;
The highly regarded authorship of the very successful casebook, Constitutional Law, Fifth Edition;
Numerous well-crafted problems with which students can practice applying legal principles in hypothetical situations.
New to the Third Edition:
Major new cases;
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union on the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA);
Virginia v. Black on content-based restrictions on freedom of expression;
U.S. v. American Library Association and Randall v. Sorrell on content-neutral restrictions;
Eldred v. Ashcroft on freedom of the press and the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA);
New materials on the Establishment clause and the Free Exercise clause;
Updated notes on recent scholarship concerning free speech and the religion clauses.
Whether you use First Amendment, Third Edition, as a stand-alone text in a First Amendment elective, or as a supplement in a Constitutional Law course, this outstanding author team will illuminate your coverage of First Amendment topics with their passion and erudition.
Featured in the Third Edition:
An up-to-date, in-depth, and cogent treatment of First Amendment issues, with a 75/25 split in coverage between speech and religion;
A balance of historical, theoretical, and practical approaches;
The highly regarded authorship of the very successful casebook, Constitutional Law, Fifth Edition;
Numerous well-crafted problems with which students can practice applying legal principles in hypothetical situations.
New to the Third Edition:
Major new cases;
Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union on the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA);
Virginia v. Black on content-based restrictions on freedom of expression;
U.S. v. American Library Association and Randall v. Sorrell on content-neutral restrictions;
Eldred v. Ashcroft on freedom of the press and the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA);
New materials on the Establishment clause and the Free Exercise clause;
Updated notes on recent scholarship concerning free speech and the religion clauses.
Whether you use First Amendment, Third Edition, as a stand-alone text in a First Amendment elective, or as a supplement in a Constitutional Law course, this outstanding author team will illuminate your coverage of First Amendment topics with their passion and erudition.