Federalism And The Tug Of War Within

As environmental, national security, and technological challenges push American law into ever more inter-jurisdictional territory, this book proposes a model of 'Balanced Federalism' that mediates between competing federalism values and provides greater guidance for regulatory decision-making.

Over the past two decades Global Legal Pluralism has become one of the leading analytical frameworks for understanding and conceptualizing law in the 21st century. Wherever one looks, there is conflict among multiple legal regimes. Some of these regimes are state-based, some are built and maintained by non-state actors, some fall within the purview of local authorities and jurisdictional entities, and some involve international courts, tribunals, and arbitral bodies, and regulatory organizations. Global Legal Pluralism has provided, first and foremost, a set of useful analytical tools for describing this conflict among legal and quasi-legal systems. At the same time, some pluralists have also ventured in a more normative direction, suggesting that legal systems might sometimes purposely create legal procedures, institutions, and practices that encourage interaction among multiple communities. These scholars argue that pluralist approaches can help foster more shared participation in the practices of law, more dialogue across difference, and more respect for diversity without requiring assimilation and uniformity. Despite the veritable explosion of scholarly work on legal pluralism, conflicts of law, soft law, global constitutionalism, the relationships among relative authorities, transnational migration, and the fragmentation and reinforcement of territorial boundaries, no single work has sought to bring together these various scholarly strands, place them into dialogue with each other, or connect them with the foundational legal pluralism research produced by historians, anthropologists, and political theorists. Paul Schiff Berman, one of the world's leading theorists of Global Legal Pluralism, has gathered over 40 diverse authors from multiple countries and multiple scholarly disciplines to touch on nearly every area of legal pluralism research, offering defenses, critiques, and applications of legal pluralism to 21st-century legal analysis. Berman also provides introductions to every part of the book, helping to frame the various approaches and perspectives. The result is the first comprehensive review of Global Legal Pluralism scholarship ever produced. This book will be a must-have for scholars and students seeking to understand the insights of legal pluralism to contemporary debates about law. At the same time, this volume will help energize and engage the field of Global Legal Pluralism and push this scholarly trajectory forward into another two decades of innovation.

How should we strike a balance between the benefits of centralized and local governance, and how important is context to selecting the right policy tools? This uniquely broad overview of the field illuminates our understanding of environmental federalism and informs our policy-making future. Professor Kalyani Robbins has brought together an impressive team of leading environmental federalism scholars to provide a collection of chapters, each focused on a different regime. This review of many varied approaches, including substantial theoretical material, culminates in a comparative analysis of environmental federalism and consideration of what each system might learn from the others. The Law and Policy of Environmental Federalism includes clear descriptive portions that make it a valuable teaching resource, as well as original theory and a depth of policy analysis that will benefit scholars of federalism or environmental and natural resources law. The value of its analysis for real-world decision-making will make it a compelling read for practitioners in environmental law or fields concerned with federalism issues, including those in government or NGOs, as well as lobbyists.

Territorial autonomy in Spain has reached a crossroads. After over thirty years of development, the consensus regarding its appropriateness has started to crumble. The transformation project embodied by the reform of Statute of Catalonia (2006) has failed to achieve its most significant demands. Although the concept of Spain as a Federation is disputed -more within the country than beyond-, the evolution of the Spanish system needs to follow a markedly federalist path. In this perspective, reference models assume critical importance. This edition gathers the works of a broad group of European, American and Spanish experts who analyse the present-day challenges of their respective systems. The objective, thus, is to contribute ideas which might help to address the evolution of the Spanish system in the light of the experience of more established Federations. This first volume analyses the challenges facing federal systems in the age of globalisation from a global perspective. It also addresses current questions and the challenges faced today by, in the sphere of the internal division of powers, the most significant ‘western’ federal systems, on the one hand, and the Spanish system of territorial autonomy, on the other.

Does the green movement remain a transformative force in American life? In Environment in the Balance Jonathan Cannon interprets a wide range of U.S. Supreme Court decisions over four decades and explores the current ferment among activists, to gauge the practical and cultural impact of environmentalism and its future prospects.

No previous book has pulled together into one place a single, comprehensive volume that provides up-to-date coverage of state government and politics, along with the states’ current and future public policies. This new book does just that, offering students, scholars, citizens, policy advocates, and state specialists accessible information on state politics and policy in 34 topical chapters written by experts in the field. The guide provides contemporary analysis of state institutions, processes, and public policies, along with both historical and theoretical perspectives that help readers develop a comprehensive understanding of the 50 U.S. states’ complex and changing political spheres. Those who use this volume—from experienced scholars to neophytes—can rely upon the guide to provide: Basic factual information on state politics and policy Core explanatory frameworks and competing arguments Insightful coverage of major policy areas as they have played out in the states.

An intellectual history of American conservativism since the New Deal. The New Deal fundamentally changed the institutions of American constitutional government and, in turn, the relationship of Americans to their government. Johnathan O'Neill's Conservative Thought and American Constitutionalism since the New Deal examines how various types of conservative thinkers responded to this significant turning point in the second half of the twentieth century. O'Neill identifies four fundamental transformations engendered by the New Deal: the rise of the administrative state, the erosion of federalism, the ascendance of the modern presidency, and the development of modern judicial review. He then considers how various schools of conservative thought (traditionalists, neoconservatives, libertarians, Straussians) responded to these major changes in American politics and culture. Conservatives frequently argued among themselves, and their responses to the New Deal ranged from adaptation to condemnation to political mobilization. Ultimately, the New Deal pulled American governance and society permanently leftward. Although some of the New Deal's liberal gains have been eroded, a true conservative counterrevolution was never, O'Neill argues, a realistic possibility. He concludes with a plea for conservative thinkers to seriously reconsider the role of Congress—a body that is relatively ignored by conservative intellectuals in favor of the courts and the presidency—in America's constitutional order. Conservative Thought and American Constitutionalism since the New Deal explores the scope and significance of conservative constitutional analysis amid the broader field of American political thought.

The Supreme Court is a tiny institution that can resolve only a fraction of the constitutional issues generated by the American government. This simple yet startling fact is impossible to deny, but few students of the Court have seriously considered its implications. In Rationing the Constitution, Andrew Coan explains how the Court's limited capacity shapes U.S. constitutional law and argues that the limits of judicial capacity powerfully constrain Supreme Court decision-making on many of the most important constitutional questions, spanning federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. Examples include the commerce power, presidential powers, Equal Protection, and regulatory takings. The implications for U.S. constitutional law are profound. Lawyers, academics, and social activists pursuing social reform through the courts must consider whether their goals can be accomplished within the constraints of judicial capacity.--