MARC Record from marc_columbia

LEADER: 03821cam a2200481 i 4500
001 12327440
005 20170419143046.0
008 160525s2016 mau b 001 0 eng c
010 $a 2016015005
020 $a9780674737426 (hard cover : alk. paper)
020 $a0674737423 (hard cover : alk. paper)
024 $a99970182636
035 $a(OCoLC)ocn946907252
035 $a(OCoLC)946907252
035 $a(NNC)12327440
040 $aMH/DLC$beng$erda$cHLS$dDLC$dBTCTA$dYDXCP$dBDX$dOCLCF$dYDX
042 $apcc
043 $an-us---
050 00 $aKF9227.C2$bS74 2016
082 00 $a345.73/0773$223
100 1 $aSteiker, Carol S.$q(Carol Susan),$eauthor.
245 10 $aCourting death :$bthe Supreme Court and capital punishment /$cCarol S. Steiker and Jordan M. Steiker.
264 1 $aCambridge, Massachusetts :$bThe Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,$c2016.
300 $a390 pages ;$c25 cm
336 $atext$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$2rdamedia
338 $avolume$2rdacarrier
520 $a"Unique among Western democracies in refusing to eradicate the death penalty, the United States has attempted instead to reform and rationalize state death penalty practices through federal constitutional law. Courting Death traces the unusual and distinctive history of top-down judicial regulation of capital punishment under the Constitution and its unanticipated consequences for our time. In the 1960s and 1970s, in the face of widespread abolition of the death penalty around the world, provisions for capital punishment that had long fallen under the purview of the states were challenged in federal courts. The U.S. Supreme Court intervened in two landmark decisions, first by constitutionally invalidating the death penalty in Furman v. Georgia (1972) on the grounds that it was capricious and discriminatory, followed four years later by its restoration in Gregg v. Georgia (1976). Since then, by neither retaining capital punishment in unfettered form nor abolishing it outright, the Supreme Court has created a complex regulatory apparatus that has brought executions in many states to a halt, while also failing to address the problems that led the Court to intervene in the first place. While execution chambers remain active in several states, constitutional regulation has contributed to the death penalty's new fragility. In the next decade or two, Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker argue, the fate of the American death penalty is likely to be sealed by this failed judicial experiment. Courting Death illuminates both the promise and pitfalls of constitutional regulation of contentious social issues"--$cProvided by publisher.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
505 0 $aBefore constitutional regulation -- The Supreme Court steps in -- The invisibility of race in the constitutional revolution -- Between the Supreme Court and the states -- The failures of regulation -- An unsustainable system? -- Recurring patterns in constitutional regulation -- The future of the American death penalty -- Life after death.
610 10 $aUnited States.$bSupreme Court.
610 17 $aUnited States.$bSupreme Court.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst00529481
650 0 $aCapital punishment$zUnited States.
650 0 $aJudicial review$zUnited States.
650 0 $aDiscrimination in capital punishment$zUnited States.
650 0 $aCapital punishment$zUnited States$xHistory.
650 7 $aCapital punishment.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst00846392
650 7 $aDiscrimination in capital punishment.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst00895027
650 7 $aJudicial review.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst00984727
651 7 $aUnited States.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst01204155
655 7 $aHistory.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst01411628
700 1 $aSteiker, Jordan M.,$eauthor.
852 00 $bglx$hKF9227.C2$iS74 2016