633 records matched your query
02770aam a2200373 i 4500 001 A20F00B2851711EEB4A9908744ECA4DB 003 SILO 005 20231117010120 008 221128s2023 ctua b 001 0 eng d 010 $a 2022950685 020 $a 0300264038 020 $a 9780300264036 035 $a (OCoLC)1375058912 040 $a YDX $b eng $e rda $c DLC $d ORX $d CLE $d OCLCO $d WLL $d VGL $d SILO 042 $a lccopycat 043 $a n-us--- 050 00 $a KF8748 $b .T354 2023 100 1 $a Tang, Aaron, $e author. 245 10 $a Supreme hubris : $b how overconfidence is destroying the court, and how we can fix it / $c Aaron Tang. 264 1 $a New Haven ; $b Yale University Press, $c [2023] 300 $a viii, 316 pages : $b illustrations ; $c 23 cm 504 $a Includes bibliographical references (pages 257-289) and index. 505 0 $a Introduction -- Part one. The problem -- Distrust and democracy -- The partisanship trap -- Overconfidence -- The times they were a changin' -- Part two. The solution -- What we do when we don't know -- The least harm principle -- Rebuilding trust -- Backsliding -- The crossroads. 520 $a "The Supreme Court, once the most respected institution in American government, is now routinely criticized for rendering decisions based on the individual justices' partisan leanings rather than on a faithful reading of the law. For legal scholar Aaron Tang, however, partisanship is not the Court's root problem. Overconfidence is. Conservative and liberal justices alike have adopted a tone of uncompromising certainty in their ability to solve society's problems with just the right lawyerly arguments. The result is a Court that lurches stridently from one case to the next, delegitimizing opposing views and undermining public confidence in itself. To restore the Court's legitimacy, Tang proposes a different approach to hard cases: a "least harm principle" under which the Court rules against the side with the greatest ability to avoid the harm it would suffer in defeat. Examining a surprising number of popular opinions where the Court has applied this approach, Tang shows how the least harm principle can provide a promising and legally grounded framework for the difficult cases that divide our nation"-- $c Dust jacket. 610 10 $a United States. $b Supreme Court 650 0 $a Judicial process $z United States. 650 0 $a Political questions and judicial power $z United States. 650 0 $a Judicial opinions $z United States. 650 6 $a Processus judiciaire $z Etats-Unis. 650 6 $a Politique et pouvoir judiciaire $z Etats-Unis. 650 6 $a Jugements $z Etats-Unis. 941 $a 1 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20231117024900.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=A20F00B2851711EEB4A9908744ECA4DBInitiate Another SILO Locator Search