| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "LEGAL POSITIVISM AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM": |
|
|
Legal Positivism in the American Political System, 2006.
A look at how legal positivism appears to be the most dominant form of legal theory in the American political system.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 5 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Legal positivism contends that laws are formulated based on the social system of the time and the sources that the social system gives authority to form legal decisions. These sources may be in the form of a constitution, amendments, judicial decisions or state legislation, for example. The belief that legal decisions are based on justice is not the foundation of law in positivism; yet, it is based on what has previously been determined, or posited in the social order. This paper discusses the American political system and contends that the court system of the United States consistently determines law in relation to the American political system based on previous judicial decisions that form the basis of the decisions of the justices.
| |
|
Comanche and Cheyenne Legal and Political Systems, 1995.
Compares the tribes' laws, norms, governments, marital status, property rights and case studies. Includes an outline.
3,600 words (approx. 14.4 pages), 9 sources, $ 127.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This paper will examine the law of some of the Plains Indians and will use the laws of the Cheyenne and Comanche tribes as case studies. The case studies selected for this paper will illustrate the political and legal systems of the Cheyenne and Comanche tribes. This paper will also compare and contrast the similarities and differences between the legal systems of these two tribes.
A review of several case histories of the Cheyenne and Comanche tribes reveals that, although the Cheyennes have a more sophisticated culture than the Comanches and the economic base of the two societies is similar, the Cheyenne culture reflects a higher level of institutionalization (Hoebel, 1969, p. 6). The most notable difference between the legal systems of the two societies is that the Comanches do not recognize their behavior ..."
| |
|
Legal Naturalism vs. Legal Positivism, 2002.
A comparison of laws understood to come about naturally or through some form of positive creation.
2,630 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two of the general theories of law - legal naturalism and legal positivism, both of which have had an enormous influence on law throughout history. The first part of the paper looks at natural law which describes those diverse theories of law that do not accept human law as true law and hold that a particular "something other than the positive law is the true law". The second section examines legal positivism where one of several general theoretical traditions is based on the belief that the source of knowledge lies in experience, not in reason, nor in mind.
From the Paper
"A good example of the usefulness of classical legal naturalism can be seen in the rise of commercial law in the Middle Ages in Europe. As Glendon, Gordon, and Carozza point out, the rise of commercial law took place when Roman civil law provided no adequate coverage of new problems that arose as trade "emerged from the localism and relative economic stagnation of the Middle Ages" in the form of international banking, expanded maritime trade, and rising commercial centers."
| |
|
The American Political System, 2004.
An overview of how the political system in the United States operates.
2,683 words (approx. 10.7 pages), 24 sources, MLA, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The American political system is a vast network of political parties, offices, and branches, including the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Each branch of the political structure has its own regulations and procedures that must be adhered to in order for the system to function properly. This paper examines those branches of government and explains how each aspect of the system is important to the modern political system.
From the Paper
"The United States Constitution contains an article, Article V, which allows for changes to be made to the original document. There are two ways in which this can be done. In one case, two thirds of both houses of Congress can vote to propose an amendment. In the second case, two third of the state legislatures can ask Congress to call a national convention to propose an amendment. Once the amendment has been proposed, it is ratified either by three fourths of the state legislatures, or by ratifying conventions in three fourths of the states. Once the amendment is ratified, it becomes part of the Bill of Rights (?Ways to Amend the Constitution?, 2000). An example of this process can be seen in the Equal Rights Amendment. This amendment passed in the House and the Congress in 1972, but has yet to be ratified by the 38 States needed to add this Amendment to the Bill of Rights (Francis, 2003)."
| |
|
Political Party Systems, 2006.
This paper compares the American and U. K. political party system.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper states that, while both the U.S. and U.K. political party systems are democratic in nature, the American system of candidate selection is more democratic because major parties in the American system allow any individual to be a candidate but major parties in the U.K.'s system pre-select candidates in central committees. The author points out that the U.S. selection process has been soundly criticized for letting money, special interests and political interests create strong favoritism for some candidates. The paper relates that the American and U.K. political system are about equal in government accountability; however, the U.K. system tends to present voters with clearer choices and candidates that are more qualified.
From the Paper
"In the United States, candidate selection is less centrally managed. In addition, the use of primaries creates more uncertainty in the process. In the U.S. system, competent and qualified candidates may be overlooked early on in favor of those with more money to spend on their campaigns, or better public personas. In addition, these individuals are not screened for qualifications or competence. The U.K.'s candidate selection system is better able to provide clear choices for voters in the general election."
| |
|
Two Political Systems, 2005.
This paper discusses two political systems: The United States of America and the Arab Republic of Egypt.
1,315 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the United States of America is a constitution-based federal republic with a strong democratic tradition. The author points out that Egypt has been politically organized since its early civilizations; in modern time, from 1923 to 1952, Egypt was a constitutional monarchy, then military officers seized control of the government and it became a republic in 1953; however, it essentially remained a military dictatorship dominated by a single political party although in 1978 a multiparty political system was instituted. The paper relates that the most obvious difference between the governments of Egypt and the United States is Egypt's adherence to Islamic Law within its legal system; the commonality is that both countries have similar political structures based on individual constitutions.
From the Paper
"The main political parties are the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, the Green Party, the Independent Party and the Libertarian Party. The constitution provided for a separation of state and government, therefore there is no government religion in the United States, although the majority of the population adheres to Christian doctrine however, because the U.S. is a country founded on basically on immigration, the landscape is comprised of many religions and many cultures. The U. S. has welcomed some fifty million immigrants, more than any other country, and admits approximately 700,000 persons per year."
| |
|
Legal Positivism and Australian Law, 2004.
This paper defines the concept of legal positivism and examines how it is applicable in the Australian law arena.
1,766 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at how Australian law is very closely linked with legal positivism, since it revolves around the concept of power. It explains that the sovereign order is treated as the final word, which cannot be altered or amended. While the same is the case in the United States, the writer points out that there is some flexibility towards modern interpretations of law. The United States gives its judiciary enough freedom to interpret law according to the circumstances. The same is, however, missing from the Australian legal system where modern interpretations are often met with disapproval. It concludes that this is the essential difference between legal systems of the two countries, a difference that has turned Australian law into a more rigid and positivistic form of law.
From the Paper
"A law must be resistant to change for that is the whole purpose of implementing laws. However they must also be flexible enough to allow modern interpretation, which is unfortunately not the case in Australia and this, is what makes Australian constitutional law positivist in nature. In other words, when a law is so rigid that it cannot allow modern interpretation and fails to keep pace with changing times, it is said to be positivistic in nature. In such laws, the interpretation is rigidly limited and the original law cannot be molded to suit modern conditions and circumstances. While then United States constitutional law is also highly resistant to change, it is nonetheless flexible enough to allow Supreme and High Courts to seek modern interpretation. However that is not the case in Australia where constitutional law is the final word of authority and to allow the law to keep pace with changing times is seen as a threat to the constitution. A very apt example of this kind of rigidity of law can be seen in Bulun Bulun case of 1999.
In this case, the copyright Law of Australia was under consideration and it was found that the rigid interpretation of the law was closely connected with legal positivism. The painter John Bulun sought Court?s help in combining customary law with the Copyright Act. Mr. Bulun Bulun wanted one of his paintings "Magpie Geese and Water Lilies at the Waterhole", to be seen as a work of co-authorship. He wanted his entire community to be the owner of this property since it was more in line with his customs and cultural beliefs.
Judge Von Doussa however refused to combine customary law with Copyright Law and decided to stay with strict interpretation of the law thus taking a positivistic approach as Bowrey (2001) explains: ?It is difficult to ascertain whether or not von Doussa grasped the cultural implications that flow from his endorsement of these precedents about joint authorship. At key points in the decision closure to consideration of the indigenous point of view was achieved by using legal positivist interpretative practice. He identified the appropriate legal rule concerning joint authorship without reference to any discourse about the meaning of the terminology. Copyright law is "entirely a creature of statute"."
| |
|
The American Political System, 2007.
An analysis of the evolution of the American political system from the colonial period to the middle of the 19th century.
1,414 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the development of the American political system as it evolved from the early colonial period through the middle of the 19th century. It also discusses the nature of political participation in the colonial period and the prominent features of the democratic system developed by the founding fathers of the United States. The paper then analyzes the way in which the political process changed during the first half of the 19th century.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
American Political History
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Indeed sectionalism continues to exist in American politics. No where is this most evident than in the two party system that has prevailed for many decade. The author explains that one could assume that the class, sectional, individualistic and pluralistic behavior of American citizens would create a political system having many different political systems to meet the needs of such a diverse electorate (Vile). However, only two parties, republicans and democrats have dominated politics in America for many decades (Vile). Although there are "Independents" and various parties that have emerged, the two dominant parties remain the Republicans and the Democrats (Rubin). The evolution of these two parties as the dominant forces in American politics has often had a polarizing impact on the nation (Rubin). Such was the case with the aforementioned election of Abraham Lincoln and such is the current case."
| |
|
?The Presidency and the Political System?, 2002.
A review and critique of the book ?The Presidency and the Political System? by Michael Nelson.
1,517 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 0 sources, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the book, "The Presidency and the Political System" by Michael Nelson which consists of a series of theoretical overviews, with several essays and excerpts beneath each rubric, detailing the nature of the modern American presidency. It discusses how at first, this may seem to give the book the quality of a simply summary or an overview of American history, however, the book emerges overall as a penetrating analysis of the nature of the American Presidency in the current era of politics. It looks at how it challenges the reader with the potent question of why should the American system continue in the form that it has over the course of the past century and into the 21st century.
From the Paper
"Nelson frames the book with an editorial preface entitled ?Evaluating the Presidency.? Nelson suggests that this institution of leadership is both strong, but is in need of further adjustments to become fully responsive to the changing needs of the postmodern era. The first part of the book, entitled, ?Presidency in Comparative Perspective? is particularly illustrative in light of current critiques of the United States? relationship with the European powers. ?Comparing the Core Executive in Britain, France, and the United States,? Nigel Bowles stresses how the British Prime Minister is less invested with the awesome symbolic weight of the American Presidency, because of the existence of the monarchy. Yet the Prime Minister is in a way more powerful as a chief executive, than is the American President, because under the British system, the Prime Minister always has a majority in the legislative branch."
| |
|
American Political and Judicial System, 2002.
A look at the American political and judicial system.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This six-page undergraduate paper describes in detail the American Political and Judicial system. From the beginning, the system was set up to establish widespread democratic participation to elect leaders to institutions that are limited and have checks on what they can do.
| |
|
Natural Law vs. Legal Positivism, 2006.
An argument that natural law is superior to legal positivism.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 4 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In an increasingly secular world natural law has frequently fallen under intense scrutiny. This paper, however, argues that natural law is superior to legal positivism and stands up well to three common criticism leveled against it; first that natural law is at least as subjective as any statute passed by legal positivists, second that natural law can impress a certain more absolutism and dogmatism upon the crafting and interpretation of the law which is inherently unhealthy in evolving societies, and thirdly that natural law is predicated upon faith and not upon reason as is the positive law tradition.
| |
|
The American Political System, 2002.
This paper discusses the concept of reciprocity as the basis of the American political system.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper suggests that the American political system is not based on the concept of reciprocity. The author believes that the individual does not get out exactly what her or she puts into the system.
| |
|
The American Political System, 2003.
A study of how the American political system functions.
6,210 words (approx. 24.8 pages), 0 sources, APA, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the American political system, focusing on three different aspects: (1) the strength or weakness of the American federal government; (2) the development of the regulatory state; and (3) the role of economic conditions in voting behavior.
| |
|
Two Party Political System, 2006.
A review of the two party political system in the USA.
760 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reports that a two-party political system is one in which only two parties effectively compete for government office, and although third parties may compete, they usually have to surmount significant barriers to be placed on the ballot paper.
From the Paper
"Anecdotal evidence indicates a tendency for Democratic candidates to attempt to shift the topic of discussion from character to policy and for Republican candidates to try to move the discussion from policy to character (Benoit 2004). For example, during the 1996 debates, Clinton tried to convert a character attack into a discussion of policy, and during the 2000 debate, Bush tried to move an attack on his health care record to an issue of character (Benoit 2004). Thus, Republicans tend to stress character, while Democrats emphasize policy."
| |
|
American Political System and its Philosophy., 2002.
A look at the philosophy behind the American political system.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is a 4-page critical assessment of the sentence: "The American Political System is the result of philosophy, trial and error, and yes even luck."
|
|
|
