{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["report2"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":1,"defined_names":1,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"report2","index":0,"n_rows":18,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":18,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,2,0,3],[0,4,0,5],[1,2,1,3],[1,4,1,5],[2,2,2,3],[3,2,3,3],[5,2,5,3],[6,2,6,3],[7,2,7,3],[10,2,10,3],[11,2,11,3],[15,2,15,3]],"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
[null,"1.","Record Nr.",null,"UNINA9910962545603321"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"I dissent : great opposing opinions in landmark Supreme Court cases / / edited by Mark Tushnet"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Boston, : Beacon Press, c2008"]
[null,null,"ISBN",null,"0-8070-9808-6"]
[{"$nulls":4},"0-8070-9793-4"]
[null,null,"Descrizione fisica",null,"1 online resource (255 p.)"]
[null,null,"Disciplina",null,"347.73/2609"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Judicial opinions - United States"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Judicial review - United States"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Constitutional law - United States"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Inglese"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,null,null,"Note generali","Bibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph"]
[null,null,null,"Nota di bibliografia","Includes bibliographical references (p. 225-229)."]
[null,null,"Nota di contenuto",null,"Intro -- Introduction: Why Dissent? -- Chapter 1: \"The legislature is entitled to all the deference that is due the judiciary.\" -- Chapter 2: \"Experience should teach us wisdom.\" -- Chapter 3: \"Among those for whom and whose posterity the Constitution was ordained and established.\" -- Chapter 4: \"To enable the black race to take the rank of mere citizens.\" -- Chapter 5: \"There is no caste here.\" -- Chapter 6: \"Room for debate and for an honest difference of opinion.\" -- Chapter 7: \"Men feared witches and burned women.\" -- Chapter 8: \"Almost anything-marriage, birth, death-may in some fashion affect commerce.\" -- Chapter 9: \"The ugly abyss of racism.\" -- Chapter 10: \"Refrain from invidious discriminations.\" -- Chapter 11: \"Our decision does not end but begins the struggle over segregation.\" -- Chapter 12: \"To attribute, however flatteringly, omnicompetence to judges.\" -- Chapter 13: \"A sterile metaphor which by its very nature may distort rather than illumine the problems.\" -- Chapter 14: \"I get nowhere in this case by talk about a constitutional 'right of privacy.' \" -- Chapter 15: \"That is what this suit is about. Power.\" -- Chapter 16 :\"Do not believe it.\" -- Conclusion -- Sources and Additional Readings."]
[null,null,null,"Sommario/riassunto","American history can be traced in part through the words of the majority decisions in landmark Supreme Court cases. Now, for the first time, one of the most distinguished Supreme Court scholars has gathered famous dissents as he considers a provocative question: how might our history appear now if these cases in the highest court in the "]
[{"$nulls":4},"country had turned out differently?  The surprising answer Tushnet offers: not all that different. Tushnet introduces and explains sixteen influential cases from throughout the Court's history, putting them into political context and offering a sense of what could have developed if the dissents were instead the majority opinions. Ultimately, Tushnet demonstrates that the words of Supreme Court justices are only one piece of a larger puzzle that defines what the Constitution means to us. We should not value their opinions over other pieces, such as social movements, politics, economics, and more.  Written in accessible and lively language, edited with a lay readership in mind, I Dissent offers an invaluable collection for anyone interested in American history and how we define constitutional rights. By placing the Supreme Court back into the framework of the government rather than viewing it as a near-sacred body issuing final decisions that cannot be questioned, Tushnet provides a radically fresh view of the judiciary and a new approach to reading the overlooked writings of major contentious figures from throughout American history.  \"An important reminder that strong challenges have been made to the best and worst in American constitutional development and that responsibility for the best lies as much in the citizenry as Supreme Courtjustices.\" --Mark A. Graber, author of Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil"]