Promotions - Choice's Outstanding Academic Titles 2016 -

The thought-provoking premise of this excellent book is that the norm of individual Supreme Court justices' removing themselves from the process of deciding a case should be looked at from not merely an ethical perspective (which is the conventional view) but from an institutional perspective as well. Virelli (law, Stetson Univ.) argues that decisions by justices to recuse themselves--or, alternatively, to refuse to recuse themselves--have important implications for the separation of powers. After tracking the development of recusal, as a general concept and its evolution within the American legal tradition, Virelli places the debate over recusal standards into the larger context of interbranch relations and the Constitution's varying ability to provide guidance in these situations. The achievement of this book is how it transforms what is normally a stolid question about ethical standards into a vibrant inquiry about the intersection of government power and binding rules. The creative nature of this project is buttressed by a lively, accessible writing style; it is a valuable resource for students and experienced scholars alike.Summing Up: Essential. All readership levels.

Hasen (Univ. of California, Irvine) is one of the nation's top scholars on election law. Here, he brings that expertise to bear on the US Supreme Court's 2008Citizens United decision. Weaving together political science, economic, and legal studies, Hasen lays out a compelling case for the ways in which the decision to remove limits on corporate and union campaign spending gives more political power to the wealthiest. At the same time, he is more considerate of the very real First Amendment concerns in campaign finance than most critics of the decision. This leads him to lay out a new path forward for adopting reform in the near and long term, a path focused on the concept of political equality. The writing is accessible to undergraduates and general readers, explaining social scientific research and legal debates in clear terms. Though he is very much a critic of the decision, his thought-provoking reform plan can be used to spark classroom discussion about campaign finance that is grounded in a deeper understanding of what is at stake in balancing different values.Summing Up: Highly recommended.

Goluboff (Univ. of Virginia) delivers an intelligently articulated, well-researched explication of vagrancy laws, including how new interpretations helped transform American society during the 1960s. In clear although sometimes intricate prose, the author presents a fascinating history of how this jurisprudential strand affected workers and radicals, the downtrodden and the seemingly aberrant, civil rights activists and women, criminal defendants, and countercultural participants.Vagrant Nation points to how vagrancy laws managed, nevertheless, to remain largely obscure until determined advocates helped delegitimize such legislation. The book features little-known plaintiffs, renowned attorneys such as Al Wirin and Ernest Besig, and liberal Supreme Court justices, particularly William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, and William J. Brennan. Over two decades, they helped prevent one way to criminalize "nonconformity, dissent, and disorder." This was in keeping with the zeitgeist of the 1960s, when establishment verities were so often called into question. The battle was never fully won, however, with a high court-sanctioned turn toward stop-and-frisk police actions as well as reliance on laws pertaining to disorderly conduct and breach of peace.Summing Up: Essential. Upper-division undergraduates through faculty.