Religious Law and Civil Law of Marriage in the United States

2020 ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Richard J. Jones
Author(s):  
Mathias Risse

This chapter examines the relationship between immigration and collective ownership of the earth, and whether the physical aspect of immigration provides constraints on immigration policy. The fact that the earth is originally collectively owned must affect how communities can regulate access to what they occupy. The chapter first considers an account of relative over- and underuse of original resources before discussing illegal immigration in the United States, using a parallel to the civil law notion of “adverse possession” to argue that, under certain conditions, illegal immigration is morally unobjectionable. It then formulates conditions under which it would be reasonable for co-owners to refrain from entering certain regions, even though they would violate no duties of justice by doing so. This proposal is part of the overall approach to global justice that pluralist internationalism develops.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi

This book is about the stunning birth and growth of judicial review in the civil law world, since 1945. In Volume I of this two-volume series, I showed that judicial review was born and grew in common law G-20 constitutional democracies and in Israel primarily: (1) when there is a need for a federalism or a separation of powers umpire, (2) when there is a rights from wrongs dynamic, (3) when there is borrowing, and (4) when the political structure of a country’s institutions leaves space within which the judiciary can operate. The countries discussed in Volume I were the following: (1) the United States, (2) Canada, (3) Australia, (4) India, (5) Israel, (6) South Africa, and (7) the United Kingdom....


Author(s):  
Gwladys Gilliéron

This chapter compares U.S. plea bargaining with plea-bargaining-type procedures and penal orders in Continental Europe, with reference to Switzerland, Germany, and France. It first considers consensual criminal procedures across jurisdictions and why they exist, focusing on plea bargaining in the U.S. criminal justice system and abbreviated trial procedures in European civil law systems. It then examines the extent to which abbreviated trial procedures in civil law systems differ from plea bargaining in the U.S. system, the problems inherent in consensual criminal procedures, and the question of whether there are any solutions. In particular, it explains how plea bargaining and penal orders may lead to wrongful convictions. Finally, it discusses prospects for reform of plea bargaining in the United States and in civil law systems in Europe.


Author(s):  
Mary Garvey Algero

Despite the fundamental differences between the doctrines employed in common law and civil law (or mixed) jurisdictions when it comes to the respect paid to prior court decisions and their weight or value, United States courts that follow the common law doctrine of stare decisis have embraced some of the flexibility inherent in the civil law doctrine, and civil law and mixed jurisdictions throughout the world, including Louisiana, that use the doctrine of jurisprudence constante seem to have come to value the predictability and certainty that come with the common law doctrine. This Article suggests that Louisiana courts are striking the right balance between valuing the predictability and certainty of interpretation that comes with a healthy respect for precedent and maintaining the flexibility and adaptability of the law by not strictly considering precedent a source of law. This Article discusses the results of an ongoing examination of the sources of law and the value of precedent in Louisiana. The examination involves a study of Louisiana legislation, Louisiana courts’ writings about the sources of law and precedent, and a survey of Louisiana judges. Part of the examination included reviewing Louisiana judicial opinions on various issues to determine if there were differences in valuing precedent based on area of law or topic. It also included reviewing judicial opinions from the United States Supreme Court and New York state courts to compare these courts’ approaches to the use of precedent with those of the Louisiana courts. The article is based on a paper presented to the Third Congress of Mixed Jurisdiction Jurists, which was held in Jerusalem, Israel in June 2011, and the author’s prior writings on the subject.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-52
Author(s):  
Eithne D'Auria

Alienation of church property is governed by both canon law and civil law, which may give rise to conflict. This paper addresses issues surrounding the Roman Catholic canonical requirements for alienation including the need to consult experts. Failure to consult, itself may give rise to concerns over the validity of the diocesan bishop's permission to alienate and, in turn, the lawfulness of the sale. This is not merely academic. Churches in the United States find themselves in the position where ownership of temporal goods is of increasing interest to the civil courts in the pursuit of compensation for successful litigants in the current wave of abuse cases.


1936 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 1023
Author(s):  
J. B. Thayer ◽  
H. Milton Colvin

Jurnal Hukum ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 1617
Author(s):  
Siti Rodhiyah Dwi Istinah

AbstrakMembandingkan sistem pemerintahan presidensiil di Indonesia dalam sistem hukum civil law dengan sistem presidensiil Amerika Serikat (AS) dalam sistem hukum common law, dapat dipahami perkembangan karakteristik sistem ketatanegaraan masing-masing negara. Mengikuti perkembangan pemikiran  founding fathers tentang dasar negara, mereka menyatakan pembentukan negara Republik Indonesia didasarkan atas corak hidup bangsa Indonesia yaitu sistem kekeluargaan dan akan menggunakan sistem pemerintahan yang sesuai dengan corak masyarakatnya. Akan tetapi dengan adanya reformasi pada tahun 1998, penegasan sistem pemerintahan presidensiil disepakati dalam agenda sidang MPR yang membahas tentang perubahan UUD 1945. Dalam pelaksanaan sistem presidensiil di Indonesia yang tumbuh dalam sistem civil law terdapat juga pengaruh common law. Dibuktikan dengan dianutnya prinsip-prinsip parlementarian. Ada upaya purifikasi sistem presidensiil, akan tetapi menjadi perlu pembenahan terutama pada infrastruktur politik dan penataan beberapa Undang-Undang (UU) di bidang politik. Sedangkan sistem pemerintahan presidensiil Amerika Serikat sudah menyatu dalam praktek ketatanegaraannya, karena Amerika Serikat merupakan tanah kelahiran sistem presidensiil dan merupakan contoh ideal karena memenuhi hampir semua kriteria yang ada dalam sistem pemerintahan presidensiil. Ada beberapa kelebihan dan kekurangan  di masing-masing sistem pemerintahan presidensiil antara Indonesia dengan Amerika Serikat. Hal ini disebabkan beberapa pengaruh   yang mendukung efektifitas pelaksanaan sistem tersebut antara lain tentang sistem hukum yang mendasarinya, sistem kepartaian, sistem politik dan perkembangan demokrasi yang mewarnai pelaksanaan sistem ketatanegaraannya. Kata kunci: Perbandingan, Sistem Pemerintahan, Common Law, Civil Law, Sistem Pemerintahan Presidensiil AbstractComparing the presidential government system in Indonesia under civil law system with a presidential system of the United States (US) under a common law system, it can be understood from the development of the characteristics of the constitutional system of each country. Following the development of the basic ideas of the founding fathers of the state, they declared the establishment of the Republic of Indonesia based on the style of life of the Indonesian nation that kinship system and will use a system of government in accordance with a pattern of society. However, with the reform in 1998, assertion of presidential government system was agreed on the agenda of the Assembly session that discusses the changes in the Constitution of 1945. In the implementation of the presidential system in Indonesia is growing in the civil law system there is also the influence of the common law. It is proved by the principles espoused of the parliament. There are efforts to purify the presidential system, but it becomes necessary infrastructure improvements, especially in the political and structuring some Act (Act) in politics. While the US system of presidential government are united in the practice of political subdivision, because the United States is the birthplace of the presidential system and is an ideal figure since it meets almost all the criteria that exist in the system of presidential government. There are some advantages and disadvantages of each system of presidential government between Indonesia and the United States. This is due to several influences that support the effective implementation of the system, among others, about the underlying legal system, party system, political system and democratic development that characterizes the implementation of the system of political subdivisions. Keywords: Comparison, System Administration, Common Law, Civil Law, Presidential Government System 


Author(s):  
Richard Lippke

This chapter examines the fundamental values that ought to inform criminal procedure. More specifically, it considers what we ideally should want from the rules and procedures that exist in legal jurisdictions throughout the world. Three fundamental values are discussed—human dignity, truth, and fairness—and the ways in which they can be upheld or subverted by criminal justice practices. Illustrations are drawn primarily from the United States, but reference is also made to criminal procedure in other countries, including those in the civil law tradition. The article concludes by analyzing two further candidates for inclusion on the list of fundamental values of criminal procedure: the “effectiveness” of criminal procedure and the value of “expertise” that highlights the distinction between the common law and civil law traditions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document