Jury Nullification

This book has a completely original theme, or set of themes. It offers first a new way of analyzing styles of legal reasoning--between more "formal" and more "substantive" styles--that is a major contribution to jurisprudence in its own right. The authors then go on to demonstrate in detail the differences in legal reasoning--and in the legal systems as a whole--between England and America, and suggest that the English is a much more "formal" system and the American a more "substantive." Finally, the book explores a wide range of cultural, institutional, and historical factors relating to the two legal systems.

The United States is so ensconced in the adversary system of trial justice that it has escaped serious public scrutiny. Yet it is replete with substantive deficiencies and injustices. As few others have, this book discusses and illustrates the major problems endemic to the adversary system in a scholarly but provocative fashion. Particular attention is given to the limitations of juries and the corrupting role trial attorneys often have on factfinding and jury decision-making. The book's most salient contribution is a comprehensive and detailed scheme of proposed reforms. Many are adopted from foreign trial systems and domestic alternative dispute resolution mechanisms; others are based on a long overdue revamping of the jury system.

Although criminal justice systems vary greatly around the world, one theme has emerged in all western jurisdictions in recent years: a rise in both the rhetoric and practice of severe punishment at a time when public opinion has played a pivotal role in sentencing policy and reforms. Despite the differences among jurisdictions, startling commonalities exist among the five countries-the U.K., USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand--surveyed here. Drawing on the results of representative opinion surveys and other research tools the authors map public attitudes towards crime and punishment across countries and explore the congruence between public views and actual policies. Co-authored by four distinguished sentencing policy experts, Penal Populism and Public Opinion is a clarion call for limiting the influence of penal populism and instituting more informed, research- based sentencing policies across the western world.

This volume is a report on the historical, legal, and political aspects of the jury system as it operates in America. The authors combine accounts of jury trials and case law with the latest findings from the social sciences.

Powerful emotion and pursuit of self-interest have many times led people to break the law with the belief that they are doing so with sound moral reasons. This study, a comprehensive philosophical and legal analysis of the gray area in which the foundations of law and morality clash, views these oblique circumstances from two perspectives: that of the person who faces a possible conflict between the claims of morality and law and must choose whether or not to obey the penal code; and that of the people who make and uphold laws and must decide whether to treat someone with a moral claim to disobey differently from ordinary lawbreakers. In examining the extent of the obligations owed by citizens to their government, Greenawalt concentrates on the possible existence of a single source of obligation that reaches all citizens and all laws. He also discusses techniques of amelioration of punishment for conscientious lawbreakers, asking how far legal systems should go to accommodate individuals who break the law for reason of conscience. Drawing from numerous examples of conflicts between law and morality, Greeawalt illustrates in detail the positions and predicaments of potential lawbreakers and lawmakers alike.

In this timely and provocative volume, some of the world's leading political and constitutional theorists come together to debate Michael Sandel's celebrated thesis that the United States is in the the grip of a flawed public philosophy - "procedural liberalism". Beginning with an original stage-setting introduction by Ronald Beiner, and ending with a reply by Michael Sandel, Sandel's liberal and feminist critics square off with his communitarian and civic republican sympathizers in a lively and wide-ranging discussion spanning constitutional law, culture, and political economy. Practical, topical issues of immigration, gay marriage, federalism, adoption, abortion, corporate speech, militias, and economic disparity are debated alongside theories of civic virtue, citizenship, identity, and community. Not only does this volume provide the most comprehensive and insightful critique of Sandel's Democracy's Discontent to date - it also makes a very significant, substantive contribution to contemporary political and legal philosophy in its own right. It will prove essential reading for all those interested in the future of American politics, law, and public philosophy.

This is the first volume in what is intended to be an annual series designed to publish lectures delivered at the Centre for European Law Studies in Oxford. These lectures have been sponsored by one of Britain's largest law firms, Clifford Chance. The first volume brings together lectures given by some of Britain's most distinguished academic lawyers and judges. These lectures have appeared previously only in pamphlet form.