• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
The South African Constitutional Court has issued internationally prominent decisions abolishing the death penalty, enforcing socioeconomic rights, allowing gay marriage, and promoting equality. These decisions are striking given the country's apartheid past and the absence of a grand human rights tradition. By contrast, the U.S. Supreme Court has generally ruled more conservatively on similar questions. This book examines the Constitutional Court in detail to determine how it has functioned during South Africa's transition and compares its rulings to those of the U.S. Supreme Court on similar rights issues. The book also analyzes the scholarly debate about the Constitutional Court taking place in South Africa. It furthermore addresses the arguments of those international scholars who have suggested that constitutional courts do not generally bring about social change. In the end, the book highlights a transformative pragmatic method of constitutional interpretation - a method the U.S. Supreme Court could employ.

constitutional law, comparative law, constitutional interpretation, human rights, South African law

Abstract:
This short paper is one chapter in a book that addresses the difficulties rebuilding the political, legal, and other structures in societies ravaged by conflict. In particular, this paper examines the advantages and disadvantages of African nations using prosecutions or restorative approaches to address past wrongs. The paper focuses on South Africa Rwanda and Sierra Leone. The paper concludes that while each country's situation differs dramatically, reconciliatory approaches may be preferable. It also argues that any prosecutions should be based on deterrence, and not retribution.

Africa, reconciliation, prosecution

Abstract:
U.S. magistrate-judges have obtained increasing responsibilities in the federal judiciary. The Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2000 gave magistrate-judges certain kinds of contempt powers that are more often associated with Article III federal judges. This paper analyzes these contempt powers and shows that at least one part of the Act may be unconstitutional.

magistrates, courts, U.S. Constitution, Article III, contempt