161 records matched your query
03432aam a2200517 i 4500 001 9A3E84CA468F11E7B6F4D8AFDAD10320 003 SILO 005 20170601010022 008 160408t20172017ctu b 001 0 eng c 010 $a 2016941955 020 $a 0300211589 020 $a 9780300211580 035 $a (OCoLC)946481671 040 $a BTCTA $b eng $e rda $c BTCTA $d YDXCP $d BDX $d TOH $d OCLCQ $d YUS $d GWL $d TNH $d OCLCF $d IGA $d RCJ $d CLU $d OCLCQ $d ONS $d SILO 042 $a pcc 043 $a n-us--- 050 4 $a KF8748 $b .C546 2017 082 14 $a 347.7326 $b CHEMERIN 2017 100 1 $a Chemerinsky, Erwin, $e author. 245 10 $a Closing the courthouse door : $b how your constitutional rights became unenforceable / $c Erwin Chemerinsky. 246 3 $a Closing the court house door 264 1 $a New Haven ; $b Yale University Press, $c [2017] 300 $a xi, 262 pages ; $c 25 cm 504 $a Includes bibliographical references (pages 211-242) and index. 505 0 $a Why do we have federal courts? -- Suing the government : the king can do wrong -- Suing government officers -- An alleged constitutional violation always should be adjudicated -- The great writ : how habeas corpus has been suspended -- Opening the federal courthouse doors -- Enforcing the Constitution. 520 $a "The Supreme Court's decisions on constitutional rights are well known and much talked about. But individuals who want to defend those rights need something else as well: access to courts that can rule on their complaints. And on matters of access, the Court's record over the past generation has been almost uniformly hostile to the enforcement of individual citizens' constitutional rights. The Court has restricted who has standing to sue, expanded the immunity of governments and government workers, limited the kinds of cases the federal courts can hear, and restricted the right of habeas corpus. Closing the Courthouse Door, by the distinguished legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, is the first book to show the effect of these decisions: taken together, they add up to a growing limitation on citizens' ability to defend their rights under the Constitution. Using many stories of people whose rights have been trampled yet who had no legal recourse, Chemerinsky argues that enforcing the Constitution should be the federal courts' primary purpose, and they should not be barred from considering any constitutional question"--Jacket. 610 10 $a United States. $b Supreme Court. 610 17 $a United States. $b Supreme Court. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00529481 650 0 $a Constitutional law $z United States 650 0 $a Due process of law $z United States. 650 0 $a Courts $z United States 650 0 $a Civil rights $z United States 650 7 $a LAW $x Constitutional. $2 bisacsh 650 7 $a LAW $x Legal History. $2 bisacsh 650 7 $a POLITICAL SCIENCE $x Judicial Branch. $x Judicial Branch. $2 bisacsh 650 7 $a POLITICAL SCIENCE $x Civil Rights. $2 bisacsh 650 7 $a Civil rights $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00862627 650 7 $a Constitutional law $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00875797 650 7 $a Courts $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00881747 650 7 $a Due process of law $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00899343 651 7 $a United States $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01204155 941 $a 2 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20191213023406.0 952 $l GAAX314 $d 20170601010048.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=9A3E84CA468F11E7B6F4D8AFDAD10320 994 $a Z0 $b HL6Initiate Another SILO Locator Search