Suchergebnisse

Judicial architecture and iconography play important roles in the symbolic lives of courts. Political scientists have noted that symbols of justice, judicial objectivity, and neutrality convey to the public "legitimizing messages" about the judiciary. In the United States these legitimizing symbols frequently expressed themselves through the temple-like attributes of courthouses. Modern architects, however, have rejected this classic paradigm and replaced it with dignified, yet open, edifices. The Israeli Supreme Court building, dedicated in 1992, is an outstanding example of such innovative design. Its emblems of legitimacy include historical, religious, and judicial symbolism. Within a comparative framework, this article explores the unique architectural images of Israel's high court and argues that they may help it to survive the fractious Israeli political milieu into which the tribunal has inserted itself.The symbolism of judicial structures can convey voluminous messages about classic themes in the study of law, history, and politics. Judicial images reflected in court architecture and art may reveal the importance of the rule of law, judicial independence, and judicial power in a political and legal culture. The physical manifestations of a court structure, and how they are transmitted to the public, may also influence media and other public perceptions of tribunals, judges, and their decisions. The architecture of the Israeli Supreme Court building, which opened to rave reviews in 1992, adds two other facets to this mix, namely, religion and historic location.

Intro -- CONTENTS -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- PRESIDENTIAL CROSSROADS -- THE LIVING PRESIDENCY -- CROSSROADS OF THE (C)ONSTITUTIONAL PRESIDENCY -- ON BEING UNPRESIDENTIAL -- THE PEOPLE, THE PRESIDENT, AND THE CONGRESS AT A CROSSROADS -- THE CROSSROADS OF IMPEACHMENT -- AMERICAN REGICIDE -- THE PERSONAL PRESIDENCY AT A CONSTITUTIONAL CROSSROADS -- CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS -- CROSSROADS IN VICE-PRESIDENTIAL HISTORY -- PRESIDENTS, REFOUNDINGS, AND THE "LIVING CONSTITUTION" -- CONTRIBUTORS -- INDEX.

AbstractA relatively nascent discipline, the field of hate studies has been explored and theorised from a multiplicity of disciplinary contexts. However, the field is ill-defined, and the relationship between hate crime and other related concepts unexplored. Here, we consider the range of phenomena which might fall within or without the field of hate studies, initiating a discussion of the boundaries of the field. We signal both the continuities and discontinuities among and between an array of strategies intended to sort and maintain hierarchical relationships, with the purpose of provoking scholars in the field of hate studies to reflect on its scope.

Hate flourishes in an enabling environment; it is nourished by broadly circulating narratives of hostility and demonisation. This has become painfully clear in the aftermath of Donald Trump's election as President of the United States in 2016, where the ongoing xenophobic commentary embedded in his Twitter feeds, public speeches, and even policy initiatives has generated increased hostility directed toward Others throughout the nation. This special edition of the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy aims to provide insights and analyses into public discourses of hate as found in political speech, popular expression, and media representations, inter alia. These narratives resonate with existing public sentiment around race, religion, gender, immigration, and an array of other flash points.
To access the full text of the introducton to this special issue on discourses of hate, download the accompanying PDF file.