Author : Thomas H. Burrell
Publisher : Common Consent Press
Page : 284 pages
File Size : 50,8 Mb
Release : 2016-03-08
Category : History
ISBN : 9781945104008
Magna Carta and Due Process of Law by Thomas H. Burrell Pdf
Magna Carta and Due Process of Law: The Road to American Judicial Activism provides a superb history of the rise of Parliament and the American Constitution. Unlike other authors covering this topic, Thomas Burrell examines American courts and discusses judicial activism. The due process language in the Magna Carta and English history reveals a strenuous effort to establish and protect participatory government from the arbitrary king ruling by will. In America, the framers of state and federal constitutions copied the language. Courts and common-law constitutionalism, however, rewrote the concept of the language. American courts have championed substantive due process to the detriment of representative government. After introducing the subject matter, Burrell provides a brief history of medieval political theory. The theory of kingship is examined and discussed. In the third chapter, we learn of Henry II’s rule per voluntatem as well as his assizes and the birth of the common law. The fourth chapter discusses King John and his fight with the barons leading up to the 1215 Magna Carta. With the Magna Carta, the barons established a foothold in the fight against the arbitrary king. The fifth chapter examines the remainder of the thirteenth century. With additional reform efforts, the barons took the gains of the Magna Carta to another level. Following Henry III’s reign, Edward I was a good king who ruled with his Council in Parliament. The sixth chapter discusses the rise of participatory government in the fourteenth century. During Edward II’s reign, the barons and Ordainers infiltrated the king’s Council in Parliament and transformed Parliament into a baronial system with lords and peers. In this chapter, the Commons’ petition is discussed along with the Council and the common law. Knights and burgesses, the Commons, frequently complained of royal or conciliar encroachment on the common law and Parliament’s law of the land—the need to safeguard due process of law from arbitrary forces. The seventh chapter summarizes medieval English legal history and the High Court of Parliament. Burrell makes several observations about the English Constitution. The eighth chapter carries the English Constitution into the seventeenth century. Briefly, this chapter notes conflict during the Stuarts and the resulting changes to the English form of government. Many of the gains introduced with the Magna Carta and fourteenth-century reforms were realized in the seventeenth century. The ninth chapter discusses the American Constitution and the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment uses language directly from Magna Carta’s Chapter 39. The tenth chapter examines judicial activism and substantive due process in the state and federal courts. American judges in the early nineteenth century struggled with language and fused variable meanings and constitutional common law to the concept of due process of law. Ultimately, judges inverted the original meaning from protecting participatory government to creating arbitrary government in the judiciary. One case precedent provided authority for the next until a complete fabrication of the concept was achieved. America became a judicial state. In this judicial state, judges have the power to socially reengineer society by inventing constitutional restrictions on representative government. The people are left out of the equation. Whether you are on the American or English side of the Atlantic, you’ll find Magna Carta and Due Process of Law: The Road to American Judicial Activism educational and rewarding. Have a position on gay marriage, abortion, equal rights, religious liberty, or the death penalty? Improve your knowledge and argument with Magna Carta and Due Process of Law. In the process, you’ll learn about English legal history, the American Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the United States Supreme Court.
