Death penalty in decline? : the fight against capital punishment in the decades since Furman v. Georgia - Austin Sarat editor
"This volume presents essays evaluating the similarities and differences between the legal, political, ethical, and practical landscapes confronted by the death penalty abolition movement at the time of the Furman v. Georgia decision and subsequent reversal and those confronted by the same movement today"--
Free speech : what everyone needs to know - Nadine Strossen.
"This concise but comprehensive book engagingly lays out answers to myriad questions about free speech principles and current controversies, including those pertaining to hate speech, disinformation, and social media. Nadine Strossen, one of America's leading free speech scholars and advocates, focuses on modern First Amendment law, explaining the historic factors that propelled its evolution toward more speech protection -- in particular, the civil rights movement. She highlights the many cases in which robust speech-protective principles have aided advocates of racial justice and other human rights causes. The book also shows how these rulings reflect universal, timeless values that benefit everyone, regardless of identity or ideology. Correcting prevalent misunderstandings, the book explains that the First Amendment sensibly permits government to outlaw the speech that is the most dangerous, while outlawing the censorship that is the most dangerous. The book's lively question-and-answer format clearly and memorably presents free speech tenets, citing colorful episodes and eloquent language from landmark Supreme Court opinions. It will be illuminating to a wide range of readers, from those who know nothing about free speech law, to experts who seek a well-organized summary of major doctrines, as well as insights into their background and rationales." --
Our new data tool, Tracking Major Rules in the Courts, compiles more up-to-date case results that can be easily compared across presidential administrations, and offers additional research findings. Between 2017 and 2021, the Institute for Policy Integrity[[The Institute for Policy Integrity has filed amicus briefs in several of the cases discussed in this Roundup. Policy Integrity did not represent any of the parties.]]documented the outcomes of litigation over the Trump administration's use of federal agencies to implement its policies.[[The Roundup does not include litigation over self-implementing presidential memoranda or executive orders or over project-level decisions.]] We tracked litigation over agency actions such as regulations, guidance documents, and agency memoranda.[[At times, advocates have brought lawsuits over a single agency action in multiple different courts. The Roundup combines decisions from different courts regarding the same agency action in a single entry. ]] The win-loss rate below reflects all decisions through January 20, 2021, when the Biden administration took office. [[A new administration’s litigation strategy may differ from the previous administration’s litigation strategy due to differences in policy objectives. See Bethany A. Davis Noll, “Tired of Winning”: Judicial Review of Regulatory Policy in the Trump Era, 73 Admin L. Rev. 353, 389 (2021) (noting ways in which Biden administration’s strategy changed in light of substantive goals). Accordingly, changes after President Biden took office are not clearly attributable to the Trump administration, and we did not recategorize reversals that occurred after this transition.]] Any reversals or modifications on appeal that occurred during the remainder of 2021 are noted in the case descriptions. [[The Roundup reflects wins and losses as they stood on January 20, 2021 when President Biden was inaugurated and his administration took over the defense of cases. Subsequent reversals on appeal or any other subsequent modifications that occurred prior to April 1, 2022 are noted in the relevant entry, but are not reflected in "win" or "loss" categorizations. If cases in the tracker were instead categorized as wins or losses based on subsequent substantive reversals on appeal or other subsequent modifications that occurred, 57 cases (23%) would have been successful for the administration and 188 (77%) of cases would have been unsuccessful for the administration.]] As of April 25, 2022, those updates are no longer being added.
About this Collection | NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Records | Digital Collections | Library of Congress
The processed records of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund consist of approximately 80,000 items of which about 80% (210,299 images) have been digitized thus far. Spanning the years 1915-1968, with most dating from 1940 to 1960, these records document the work and procedures of the organization as it combated racial discrimination in the nation’s courts, establishing in the process a public interest legal practice that was unprecedented in American jurisprudence. The organization’s records cover a host of topics, including segregation in schools, on buses, and in public facilities; discrimination in housing and property ownership; voting rights; police brutality; racial violence; and countless other infringements of civil rights.
