Presumed Guilty: How the Supreme Court Empowered the Police and Subverted Civil Rights
暫譯: 假定有罪:最高法院如何授權警察並顛覆公民權利

Chemerinsky, Erwin

  • 出版商: Liveright Publishing Corporation
  • 出版日期: 2022-08-09
  • 售價: $900
  • 貴賓價: 9.5$855
  • 語言: 英文
  • 頁數: 384
  • 裝訂: Quality Paper - also called trade paper
  • ISBN: 1324091975
  • ISBN-13: 9781324091974
  • 相關分類: 商業管理類
  • 無法訂購

商品描述

Police are nine times more likely to kill African-American men than they are other Americans--in fact, nearly one in every thousand will die at the hands, or under the knee, of an officer. As eminent constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky powerfully argues, this is no accident, but the horrific result of an elaborate body of doctrines that allow the police and, crucially, the courts to presume that suspects--especially people of color--are guilty before being charged.

Today in the United States, much attention is focused on the enormous problems of police violence and racism in law enforcement. Too often, though, that attention fails to place the blame where it most belongs, on the courts, and specifically, on the Supreme Court. A "smoking gun" of civil rights research, Presumed Guilty presents a groundbreaking, decades-long history of judicial failure in America, revealing how the Supreme Court has enabled racist practices, including profiling and intimidation, and legitimated gross law enforcement excesses that disproportionately affect people of color.

For the greater part of its existence, Chemerinsky shows, deference to and empowerment of the police have been the modi operandi of the Supreme Court. From its conception in the late eighteenth century until the Warren Court in 1953, the Supreme Court rarely ruled against the police, and then only when police conduct was truly shocking. Animating seminal cases and justices from the Court's history, Chemerinsky--who has himself litigated cases dealing with police misconduct for decades--shows how the Court has time and again refused to impose constitutional checks on police, all the while deliberately gutting remedies Americans might use to challenge police misconduct.

Finally, in an unprecedented series of landmark rulings in the mid-1950s and 1960s, the pro-defendant Warren Court imposed significant constitutional limits on policing. Yet as Chemerinsky demonstrates, the Warren Court was but a brief historical aberration, a fleeting liberal era that ultimately concluded with Nixon's presidency and the ascendance of conservative and "originalist" justices, whose rulings--in Terry v. Ohio (1968), City of Los Angeles v. Lyons (1983), and Whren v. United States (1996), among other cases--have sanctioned stop-and-frisks, limited suits to reform police departments, and even abetted the use of lethal chokeholds.

Written with a lawyer's knowledge and experience, Presumed Guilty definitively proves that an approach to policing that continues to exalt "Dirty Harry" can be transformed only by a robust court system committed to civil rights. In the tradition of Richard Rothstein's The Color of Law, Presumed Guilty is a necessary intervention into the roiling national debates over racial inequality and reform, creating a history where none was before--and promising to transform our understanding of the systems that enable police brutality.

商品描述(中文翻譯)

警察殺害非裔美國男性的可能性是其他美國人的九倍——事實上,幾乎每一千名非裔美國人中就有一人會死於警察之手或膝下。著名的憲法學者厄爾溫·切梅林斯基(Erwin Chemerinsky)強有力地指出,這並非偶然,而是由一套複雜的法律原則所造成的可怕結果,這些原則使得警察,尤其是法院,能夠在未被指控之前就假定嫌疑人——特別是有色人種——是有罪的。

如今在美國,許多注意力集中在執法中的警察暴力和種族主義的巨大問題上。然而,這種注意力往往未能將責任歸咎於最應該負責的地方,即法院,特別是最高法院。作為民權研究的“煙槍”,《假定有罪》(Presumed Guilty)呈現了一部開創性的、長達數十年的美國司法失敗歷史,揭示了最高法院如何使種族主義行為得以存在,包括剖析和恐嚇,並合法化對有色人種造成不成比例影響的重大執法過度行為。

切梅林斯基指出,在其存在的大部分時間裡,對警察的尊重和賦權一直是最高法院的運作模式。從十八世紀末的成立到1953年的沃倫法院(Warren Court),最高法院很少對警察作出不利裁決,只有在警察行為真正令人震驚的情況下才會如此。切梅林斯基——他自己也在數十年中處理與警察不當行為有關的案件——通過回顧法院歷史上的重要案例和法官,展示了法院一次又一次地拒絕對警察施加憲法約束,同時故意削弱美國人可能用來挑戰警察不當行為的救濟措施。

最後,在1950年代中期和1960年代的一系列前所未有的里程碑裁決中,支持被告的沃倫法院對警察行為施加了重要的憲法限制。然而,正如切梅林斯基所示,沃倫法院只是一個短暫的歷史異常,一個短暫的自由主義時代,最終隨著尼克森總統的上任和保守派及“原意主義”法官的崛起而結束,他們的裁決——如《特里訴俄亥俄州》(Terry v. Ohio, 1968)、《洛杉磯市訴萊昂斯》(City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 1983)和《惠倫訴美國》(Whren v. United States, 1996)等案件——已經批准了攔截和搜查,限制了改革警察部門的訴訟,甚至助長了致命的窒息鎖的使用。

《假定有罪》以律師的知識和經驗撰寫,明確證明了持續崇尚“骯髒哈利”(Dirty Harry)的警務方式只能通過一個致力於民權的強大法院系統來轉變。沿襲理查德·羅斯坦(Richard Rothstein)的《法律的顏色》(The Color of Law)傳統,《假定有罪》是對全國關於種族不平等和改革的激烈辯論的必要介入,創造了一段之前不存在的歷史——並承諾改變我們對促成警察暴行的系統的理解。