Faculty Bibliography
-
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Favorite
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
The work serves as a guide to understanding law, the rhetoric of law and images of justice. The book will introduce readers to new films as well as help create new perspectives on familiar classic movies.
-
Favorite
Richard D. Parker, Homeland: an Essay on Patriotism, 25 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 407 (2002).
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Richard D. Parker, Taking Politics Personally, 12 Cardozo Stud. L. & Literature 103 (2000).
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Favorite
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
Democracy—its aspirations, its dangers—is what, most fundamentally, our Constitution is about. The question, Richard Parker argues in this powerful book, is how to imagine our democracy. Provocative in style and substance, this manifesto challenges orthodoxies of constitutional legal studies, particularly the idea that constitutionalism and populist democracy stand opposed. Parker presents a populist argument. He contends that the mission of constitutional law should be to promote, not limit, the expression of ordinary political energy—thus to extend, rather than constrain, majority rule. At the root of the matter, Parker finds a question of “sensibility”—assumptions and attitudes about the political energy of ordinary people. He approaches this sensibility in a novel way, through a work of fiction about politics, Thomas Mann’s Mario and the Magician. Offering two “takes” on the story, Parker shows how it evokes—and elucidates—our deepest, most problematic attitudes about popular political energy in our own democracy. He goes on to elaborate these attitudes within our practice of constitutional argument. This is a book about the people, and for the people, a reimagination of constitutional law’s populist potential. It will disorient—then reorient—the thinking of everyone who is concerned about democracy and the Constitution.
-
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
Let me begin at the end. I want to give you some sense of where I'm going. Then, you'll begin to see where I'm coming from. I'm going to challenge three basic ideas-three connected orthodoxies-central to conventional discourse about constitutional law. They are: (1) The idea that we must define constitutional democracy as opposed to populist democracy: that constitutional constraints on public power in a democracy are meant to contain or tame the exertion of popular political energy rather than to nurture, galvanize, and release it. (2) The related idea that constitutional law is "higher" law, its substance and process superior to "ordinary" law and politics not just functionally, but (somehow) in essential quality as well. (3) The consequent idea that the main mission of modem constitutional law is to stand "above the battle" so as to protect "individuals" and "minorities" against the ruling "majority." I am going to urge, in fact, that constitutional law should be devoted as much-and even more-to promote majority rule as to limit it.
-
Richard D. Parker, Issues of Community and Liberty, 8 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 287 (1985).
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories:
-
Type:
Categories:
Sub-Categories: