000 06076nam a22004575i 4500
001 189283
003 IT-RoAPU
005 20231211162909.0
006 m|||||o||d||||||||
007 cr || ||||||||
008 230918t20092002mau fo d z eng d
020 _a9780674020153
_qPDF
024 7 _a10.4159/9780674020153
_2doi
035 _a(DE-B1597)9780674020153
035 _a(DE-B1597)574652
040 _aDE-B1597
_beng
_cDE-B1597
_erda
050 4 _aKF4552 ǂb A43 2002eb
072 7 _aLAW018000
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a323.1197073
084 _aonline - DeGruyter
100 1 _aAleinikoff, T. Alexander
_eautore
245 1 0 _aSemblances of Sovereignty :
_bThe Constitution, the State, and American Citizenship / /
_cT. Alexander Aleinikoff.
264 1 _aCambridge, MA : :
_bHarvard University Press,
_c[2009]
264 4 _c©2002
300 _a1 online resource (320 p.)
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
505 0 0 _tFrontmatter --
_tPreface --
_tContents --
_tSEMBLANCES OF SOVEREIGNTY --
_t1 Introduction --
_t2 The Sovereignty Cases and the Pursuit of an American Nation-State --
_t3 The Citizen-State: From the Warren Court to the Rehnquist Court --
_t4 Commonwealth and the Constitution: The Case of Puerto Rico --
_t5 The Erosion of American Indian Sovereignty --
_t6 Indian Tribal Sovereignty beyond Plenary Power --
_t7 Plenary Power, Immigration Regulation, and Decentered Citizenship --
_t8 Reconceptualizing Sovereignty: Toward a New American Narrative --
_tNotes --
_tIndex
506 0 _arestricted access
_uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
_fonline access with authorization
_2star
520 _aIn a set of cases decided at the end of the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court declared that Congress had "plenary power" to regulate immigration, Indian tribes, and newly acquired territories. Not coincidentally, the groups subject to Congress' plenary power were primarily nonwhite and generally perceived as "uncivilized." The Court left Congress free to craft policies of assimilation, exclusion, paternalism, and domination. Despite dramatic shifts in constitutional law in the twentieth century, the plenary power case decisions remain largely the controlling law. The Warren Court, widely recognized for its dedication to individual rights, focused on ensuring "full and equal citizenship"--an agenda that utterly neglected immigrants, tribes, and residents of the territories. The Rehnquist Court has appropriated the Warren Court's rhetoric of citizenship, but has used it to strike down policies that support diversity and the sovereignty of Indian tribes. Attuned to the demands of a new century, the author argues for abandonment of the plenary power cases, and for more flexible conceptions of sovereignty and citizenship. The federal government ought to negotiate compacts with Indian tribes and the territories that affirm more durable forms of self-government. Citizenship should be "decentered," understood as a commitment to an intergenerational national project, not a basis for denying rights to immigrants.Table of Contents: 1. Introduction 2. The Sovereignty Cases and the Pursuit of an American Nation-State 3. The Citizen-State: From the Warren Court to the Rehnqnist Court 4. Commonwealth and the Constitution: The Case of Puerto Rico 5. The Erosion of American Indian Sovereignty 6. Indian Tribal Sovereignty beyond Plenary Power 7. Plenary Power, Immigration Regulation, and Decentered Citizenship 8. Reconceptualizing Sovereignty: Toward a New American Narrative Notes Index Reviews of this book: This book not only provides careful analysis of U.S. Supreme Court and congressional relationships but also could lead to novel studies of rights and obligations in American society. Highly recommended.--Steven Puro, Library JournalReviews of this book: Aleinikoff examines sovereignty, citizenship, and the broader concept of membership (aliens as well as citizens) in the American nation-state and suggests that American constitutional law needs "understandings of sovereignty and membership that are supple and flexible, open to new arrangements".Sure to generate heated debate over the extent to which the rules governing immigration, Indian tribes, and American territories should be altered, this book is required reading for constitutional scholars.--R. J. Steamer, ChoiceAmid the overflowing scholarship on American constitutional law, little has been written on this cluster of topics, which go to the core of what sovereignty under the Constitution means. Aleinikoff asks not only how we define "ourselves," but exactly who is authorized to place themselves in the category of insiders empowered to set limits excluding others. The book stands out as a novel, intriguing, and interesting analysis against the sea of sameness found in the constitutional literature.--Philip P. Frickey, Law School, University of California, BerkeleyWhat lends Aleinikoff's work originality and importance is its synthetic range and the new insights that flow from bringing immigration, Indian, and territorial issues together, and taking on such much criticized anomalies as the plenary power doctrine in their full ambit. In my view, he may well make good on his hope of helping to inspire a new field of sovereignty studies. Certainly, the idea of "problematizing" national citizenship and national sovereignty is afoot in the law schools and, far more so, in sociology, political science, and in various interdisciplinary fields like Ameri
538 _aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546 _aIn English.
588 0 _aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 18. Sep 2023)
650 4 _aLAW / Constitutional
_2sh.
850 _aIT-RoAPU
856 4 0 _uhttps://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9780674020153
856 4 2 _3Cover
_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/cover/isbn/9780674020153/original
942 _cEB
999 _c189283
_d189283