Dr ryan j rebe (7 resultados)

Paperback. Condición: new. Paperback. The Era of Political Partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making on the U.S. Supreme Court and argues that the justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases. By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that the justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Moreover, these decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, or judicial restraint. The topics covered include: gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and mail-in voting, among others. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty years, such as: Vieth v. Jubelirer, Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, and Shelby County v. Holder. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability.…

Paperback. Condición: new. Paperback. The Era of Political Partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making on the U.S. Supreme Court and argues that the justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases. By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that the justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Moreover, these decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, or judicial restraint. The topics covered include: gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and mail-in voting, among others. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty years, such as: Vieth v. Jubelirer, Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, and Shelby County v. Holder. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability.…

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. The Era of Political Partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making on the U.S. Supreme Court and argues that the justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases. By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that the justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Moreover, these decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, or judicial restraint. The topics covered include: gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and mail-in voting, among others. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty years, such as: Vieth v. Jubelirer, Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, and Shelby County v. Holder. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability.…

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. Drawing on new data and case analyses, Ryan J. Rebe provides substantial evidence that justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases.By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and notions of fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Exploring topics such as gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and presidential immunity, Rebe demonstrates that Supreme Court decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, and judicial restraint. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty-five years, including Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, Shelby County v. Holder, and Trump v. United States. In doing so, the book provides a thorough overview of over two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the ways these cases have reshaped Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough analysis of the most important election law cases of the past twenty-five years. The findings reveal an undeniable pattern of partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court that challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability.…

Hardback. Condición: New. This item is printed on demand. New copy - Usually dispatched within 5-9 working days.

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. The Era of Political Partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making on the U.S. Supreme Court and argues that the justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases. By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that the justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Moreover, these decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, or judicial restraint. The topics covered include: gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and mail-in voting, among others. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty years, such as: Vieth v. Jubelirer, Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, and Shelby County v. Holder. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough overview of two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the impact these decisions have had on remaking Americas electoral institutions. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability.…

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. Drawing on new data and case analyses, Ryan J. Rebe provides substantial evidence that justices vote their partisan preferences on election law cases.By focusing specifically on election law, Rebe reveals a consistent pattern of partisanship on the Court. The findings controvert popular perceptions of non-biased decision-making and notions of fundamental fairness. The aggregate analysis shows that justices vote along party-lines in a majority of election law cases, and consensus-building is rare when there is a contentious electoral issue at stake. Exploring topics such as gerrymandering, campaign finance, voter ID laws, and presidential immunity, Rebe demonstrates that Supreme Court decisions often conflict with principles of stare decisis, originalism, and judicial restraint. Rebe also conducts a content analysis of the most controversial election law cases of the past twenty-five years, including Crawford v. Marion County, Citizens United v. FEC, Shelby County v. Holder, and Trump v. United States. In doing so, the book provides a thorough overview of over two decades of election law cases and sheds light on the ways these cases have reshaped Americas electoral institutions. This book provides a thorough analysis of the most important election law cases of the past twenty-five years. The findings reveal an undeniable pattern of partisanship on the U.S. Supreme Court that challenges conventional notions of consensus-building and neutral decision-making. This item is printed on demand. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability.…