Democracy's chief executive[electronic resource] :interpreting the constitution and defining the future of the presidency
- 作者: Shane, Peter M.
- 出版: Oakland, CA : University of California Press c2022.
- 稽核項: 1 online resource (320 p.).
- 標題: Constitutional history , Democracy , Presidents Legal status, laws, etc. -- United States. , Executive power United States. , Presidents , Constitutional history United States. , United States , Democracy United States. , United States Politics and government. , Politics and government. , Constitutional law , Legal status, laws, etc. , Constitutional law United States. , Executive power
- ISBN: 0520380916 , 9780520380912
- ISBN: 9780520380905
- 試查全文@TNUA:
- 附註: Includes bibliographical references and index.
- 摘要: Legal scholar Peter M. Shane confronts U.S. presidential entitlement and offers a more reasonable way of conceptualizing our constitutional presidency in the twenty-first century. In the eyes of modern-day presidentialists, the United States Constitution's vesting of "executive power" means today what it meant in 1787. For them, what it meant in 1787 was the creation of a largely unilateral presidency, and in their view, a unilateral presidency still best serves our national interest. Democracy's Chief Executive challenges each of these premises, while showing how their influence on constitutional interpretation for more than forty years has set the stage for a presidency ripe for authoritarianism. Democracy's Chief Executive explains how dogmatic ideas about expansive executive authority can create within the government a psychology of presidential entitlement that threatens American democracy and the rule of law. Tracing today's aggressive presidentialism to a steady consolidation of White House power aided primarily by right-wing lawyers and judges since 1981, Peter M. Shane argues that this is a dangerously authoritarian form of constitutional interpretation that is not even well supported by an originalist perspective. Offering instead a fresh approach to balancing presidential powers, Shane develops an interpretative model of adaptive constitutionalism, rooted in the values of deliberative democracy. Democracy's Chief Executive demonstrates that justifying outcomes explicitly based on core democratic values is more, not less, constraining for judicial decision making--and presents a model that Americans across the political spectrum should embrace.
- 電子資源: https://dbs.tnua.edu.tw/login?url=https://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9780520380912
- 系統號: 005331772
- 資料類型: 電子書
- 讀者標籤: 需登入
- 引用網址: 複製連結
Legal scholar Peter M. Shane confronts U.S. presidential entitlement and offers a more reasonable way of conceptualizing our constitutional presidency in the twenty-first century. In the eyes of modern-day presidentialists, the United States Constitution’s vesting of “executive power” means today what it meant in 1787. For them, what it meant in 1787 was the creation of a largely unilateral presidency, and in their view, a unilateral presidency still best serves our national interest. Democracy’s Chief Executive challenges each of these premises, while showing how their influence on constitutional interpretation for more than forty years has set the stage for a presidency ripe for authoritarianism. Democracy’s Chief Executive explains how dogmatic ideas about expansive executive authority can create within the government a psychology of presidential entitlement that threatens American democracy and the rule of law. Tracing today’s aggressive presidentialism to a steady consolidation of White House power aided primarily by right-wing lawyers and judges since 1981, Peter M. Shane argues that this is a dangerously authoritarian form of constitutional interpretation that is not even well supported by an originalist perspective. Offering instead a fresh approach to balancing presidential powers, Shane develops an interpretative model of adaptive constitutionalism, rooted in the values of deliberative democracy. Democracy’s Chief Executive demonstrates that justifying outcomes explicitly based on core democratic values is more, not less, constraining for judicial decision making—and presents a model that Americans across the political spectrum should embrace.
來源: Google Book
來源: Google Book
評分
