richard primus (53 resultados)

hardcover. Condición: Very Good. Estado de la sobrecubierta: Very Good.

Condición: Good. Item in good condition and has highlighting/writing on text. Used texts may not contain supplemental items such as CDs, info-trac etc.

Paperback or Softback. Condición: New. The American Language of Rights. Book.

Condición: New.

Paperback. Condición: New. Richard A. Primus examines three crucial periods in American history (the late eighteenth century, the civil war and the 1950s and 1960s) in order to demonstrate how the conceptions of rights prevailing at each of these times grew out of reactions to contemporary social and political crises. His innovative approach sees rights language as grounded more in opposition to concrete social and political practices, than in the universalistic paradigms presented by many political philosophers. This study demonstrates the potency of the language of rights throughout American history, and looks for the first time at the impact of modern totalitarianism (in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union) on American conceptions of rights. The American Language of Rights is a major contribution to contemporary political theory, of interest to scholars and students in politics and government, constitutional law, and American history.

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. A groundbreaking challenge to a core principle of constitutional law, arguing that congressional action is not limited by the legislative branch's textually enumerated powers. Every law student learns that the federal government is constrained to act only according to its enumerated powers, meaning that Congress can do what the Constitution expressly authorizes it to and nothing more. Yet Richard Primus contends that this longstanding orthodoxy-allegedly required by the text of the Constitution, the Framers' vision, and the logic of federalism-is fundamentally flawed. Through careful analysis of constitutional text and history, and of the structure of American federalism, The Oldest Constitutional Question builds a powerful argument for broad congressional authority. In particular, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. The Framers were more worried that the federal government might be fragile and anemic than that it would be overwhelmingly strong. Enumerating congressional powers is thus best understood as a way of ensuring that the federal legislature has an incontestable warrant to exercise the powers specified there, not as an exhaustive description of all that Congress can do. In practice, the enumeration of powers does little to limit Congress. But most constitutional lawyers-including many Supreme Court justices-think this means something has gone wrong, such that the courts must aggressively strike down federal laws exceeding Congress's enumerated powers. Primus's meticulous examination explodes the prevailing view, revealing its underlying errors. The constitutional system does place limits on Congress, and crucially so, but the enumeration of powers is not, and never has been, a sensible means for creating and enforcing those limits. Richard Primus challenges the prevailing view that Congress is constrained to exercise only those powers enumerated in the Constitution. Analyzing constitutional text and history, as well as the structure of US federalism, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule the listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. Shipping may be from multiple locations in the US or from the UK, depending on stock availability.

HRD. Condición: New. New Book. Shipped from UK. Established seller since 2000.

HRD. Condición: New. New Book. Shipped from UK. Established seller since 2000.

Hardback. Condición: New. A groundbreaking challenge to a core principle of constitutional law, arguing that congressional action is not limited by the legislative branch's textually enumerated powers.Every law student learns that the federal government is constrained to act only according to its enumerated powers, meaning that Congress can do what the Constitution expressly authorizes it to and nothing more. Yet Richard Primus contends that this longstanding orthodoxy-allegedly required by the text of the Constitution, the Framers' vision, and the logic of federalism-is fundamentally flawed.Through careful analysis of constitutional text and history, and of the structure of American federalism, The Oldest Constitutional Question builds a powerful argument for broad congressional authority. In particular, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. The Framers were more worried that the federal government might be fragile and anemic than that it would be overwhelmingly strong. Enumerating congressional powers is thus best understood as a way of ensuring that the federal legislature has an incontestable warrant to exercise the powers specified there, not as an exhaustive description of all that Congress can do.In practice, the enumeration of powers does little to limit Congress. But most constitutional lawyers-including many Supreme Court justices-think this means something has gone wrong, such that the courts must aggressively strike down federal laws exceeding Congress's enumerated powers. Primus's meticulous examination explodes the prevailing view, revealing its underlying errors. The constitutional system does place limits on Congress, and crucially so, but the enumeration of powers is not, and never has been, a sensible means for creating and enforcing those limits.

Condición: New. In.

Condición: New. pp. 284.

Condición: new.

Condición: New. 2025. hardcover. . . . . .

Condición: Good. Former library copy. Pages intact with minimal writing/highlighting. The binding may be loose and creased. Dust jackets/supplements are not included. Includes library markings. Stock photo provided. Product includes identifying sticker. Better World Books: Buy Books. Do Good.

Condición: New.

Hardcover. Condición: Near Fine. Estado de la sobrecubierta: Very Good. First Edition. Black cloth boards are Near Fine. DJ is Very Good with a touch of edgewear and rubbing. One small area with a bit residue from sticker. Easily cleaned. Text is pristine and binding is as if little read or unread. book.

Hardback. Condición: New. New copy - Usually dispatched within 4 working days.

Condición: Good. This is an ex-library book and may have the usual library/used-book markings inside.This book has hardback covers. In good all round condition. Dust jacket in good condition. Please note the Image in this listing is a stock photo and may not match the covers of the actual item,650grams, ISBN:9780521652506.

Condición: New. 2025. hardcover. . . . . . Books ship from the US and Ireland.

Condición: New.

Hardcover. Condición: Brand New. 448 pages. 9.50x6.50x1.50 inches. In Stock.

Hardcover. Condición: Good. A trifle bent / warped from improper storage. Dust jacket lightly soiled, worn and rubbed, small edge tears. Clean and tight interior. pol sci.; Ideas In Context; 9.3 X 6.3 X 0.9 inches; 284 pages.

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. A groundbreaking challenge to a core principle of constitutional law, arguing that congressional action is not limited by the legislative branch's textually enumerated powers. Every law student learns that the federal government is constrained to act only according to its enumerated powers, meaning that Congress can do what the Constitution expressly authorizes it to and nothing more. Yet Richard Primus contends that this longstanding orthodoxy-allegedly required by the text of the Constitution, the Framers' vision, and the logic of federalism-is fundamentally flawed. Through careful analysis of constitutional text and history, and of the structure of American federalism, The Oldest Constitutional Question builds a powerful argument for broad congressional authority. In particular, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. The Framers were more worried that the federal government might be fragile and anemic than that it would be overwhelmingly strong. Enumerating congressional powers is thus best understood as a way of ensuring that the federal legislature has an incontestable warrant to exercise the powers specified there, not as an exhaustive description of all that Congress can do. In practice, the enumeration of powers does little to limit Congress. But most constitutional lawyers-including many Supreme Court justices-think this means something has gone wrong, such that the courts must aggressively strike down federal laws exceeding Congress's enumerated powers. Primus's meticulous examination explodes the prevailing view, revealing its underlying errors. The constitutional system does place limits on Congress, and crucially so, but the enumeration of powers is not, and never has been, a sensible means for creating and enforcing those limits. Richard Primus challenges the prevailing view that Congress is constrained to exercise only those powers enumerated in the Constitution. Analyzing constitutional text and history, as well as the structure of US federalism, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule the listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. Shipping may be from our Sydney, NSW warehouse or from our UK or US warehouse, depending on stock availability.

Hardcover. Condición: new. Hardcover. A groundbreaking challenge to a core principle of constitutional law, arguing that congressional action is not limited by the legislative branch's textually enumerated powers. Every law student learns that the federal government is constrained to act only according to its enumerated powers, meaning that Congress can do what the Constitution expressly authorizes it to and nothing more. Yet Richard Primus contends that this longstanding orthodoxy-allegedly required by the text of the Constitution, the Framers' vision, and the logic of federalism-is fundamentally flawed. Through careful analysis of constitutional text and history, and of the structure of American federalism, The Oldest Constitutional Question builds a powerful argument for broad congressional authority. In particular, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. The Framers were more worried that the federal government might be fragile and anemic than that it would be overwhelmingly strong. Enumerating congressional powers is thus best understood as a way of ensuring that the federal legislature has an incontestable warrant to exercise the powers specified there, not as an exhaustive description of all that Congress can do. In practice, the enumeration of powers does little to limit Congress. But most constitutional lawyers-including many Supreme Court justices-think this means something has gone wrong, such that the courts must aggressively strike down federal laws exceeding Congress's enumerated powers. Primus's meticulous examination explodes the prevailing view, revealing its underlying errors. The constitutional system does place limits on Congress, and crucially so, but the enumeration of powers is not, and never has been, a sensible means for creating and enforcing those limits. Richard Primus challenges the prevailing view that Congress is constrained to exercise only those powers enumerated in the Constitution. Analyzing constitutional text and history, as well as the structure of US federalism, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule the listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. Shipping may be from our UK warehouse or from our Australian or US warehouses, depending on stock availability.

Hardcover. Condición: Very Good. Estado de la sobrecubierta: Very Good. 1st Edition. 1999 1st UK printing. Hardback in jacket. 23.5x16cm. xiv+262 pages with index. Clean & tight book. No inscriptions. Flat pages. Jacket is not torn. Jacket is now under clear removable covers. Dispatched Royal Mail First Class with tracking next working day or sooner securely boxed in cardboard. ref SH13. The American Language of Rights by Richard A. Primus. Ideas in Context. Cambridge University Press Series Number 54. Series edited by Quentin Skinner, Lorraine Daston & James Tully. ---------------- From the front flap: Richard A. Primus examines three crucial periods in American history (the late eighteenth century, the civil war and the 1950s and 1960s) in order to demonstrate how the conceptions of rights prevailing at each of these times grew out of reactions to contemporary social and political crises. His innovative approach sees rights language as grounded more in opposition to concrete social and political practices, than in the universalistic paradigms presented by many political philosophers. This study demonstrates the potency of the language of rights throughout American history, and looks for the first time at the impact of modern totalitarianism (in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union) on American conceptions of rights. The American Language of Rights is a major contribution to contemporary political theory, of interest to scholars and students in politics and government, constitutional law, and American history.

Taschenbuch. Condición: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - Richard A. Primus examines three crucial periods in American history (the late eighteenth century, the Civil War and the 1950s and 1960s) and demonstrates how the conceptions of rights prevailing at each of these times grew out of opposition to concrete political cases. In the first study of its kind, Primus highlights the influence of totalitarianism (in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union) on the language of rights. This book will be a major contribution to contemporary political theory, of interest to scholars and students in politics and government, constitutional law, and American history.

Paperback. Condición: New. Richard A. Primus examines three crucial periods in American history (the late eighteenth century, the civil war and the 1950s and 1960s) in order to demonstrate how the conceptions of rights prevailing at each of these times grew out of reactions to contemporary social and political crises. His innovative approach sees rights language as grounded more in opposition to concrete social and political practices, than in the universalistic paradigms presented by many political philosophers. This study demonstrates the potency of the language of rights throughout American history, and looks for the first time at the impact of modern totalitarianism (in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union) on American conceptions of rights. The American Language of Rights is a major contribution to contemporary political theory, of interest to scholars and students in politics and government, constitutional law, and American history.

Hardback. Condición: New. A groundbreaking challenge to a core principle of constitutional law, arguing that congressional action is not limited by the legislative branch's textually enumerated powers.Every law student learns that the federal government is constrained to act only according to its enumerated powers, meaning that Congress can do what the Constitution expressly authorizes it to and nothing more. Yet Richard Primus contends that this longstanding orthodoxy-allegedly required by the text of the Constitution, the Framers' vision, and the logic of federalism-is fundamentally flawed.Through careful analysis of constitutional text and history, and of the structure of American federalism, The Oldest Constitutional Question builds a powerful argument for broad congressional authority. In particular, Primus shows that the primary function of enumeration is to rule listed powers in, not to rule other powers out. The Framers were more worried that the federal government might be fragile and anemic than that it would be overwhelmingly strong. Enumerating congressional powers is thus best understood as a way of ensuring that the federal legislature has an incontestable warrant to exercise the powers specified there, not as an exhaustive description of all that Congress can do.In practice, the enumeration of powers does little to limit Congress. But most constitutional lawyers-including many Supreme Court justices-think this means something has gone wrong, such that the courts must aggressively strike down federal laws exceeding Congress's enumerated powers. Primus's meticulous examination explodes the prevailing view, revealing its underlying errors. The constitutional system does place limits on Congress, and crucially so, but the enumeration of powers is not, and never has been, a sensible means for creating and enforcing those limits.

Condición: New. In.

hardcover. Condición: New. In shrink wrap. Looks like an interesting title!