Аннотация

Аннотация

«– Конечно, не мое это дело, дружище, – сказал Чарли, – а только зря ты надумал устроить последнюю облаву. Тебе не раз доводилось попадать в опасные переплеты, иметь дело с опасными людьми, и ты остался целехонек, – вот будет обида, если с тобой под конец что стрясется. – Но как же обойтись без последней облавы? – возразил я с юношеской самонадеянностью. – Сам знаешь, все имеет конец. А раз так, какая-нибудь из моих облав должна быть последней, тут уж ничего не поделаешь…»

Аннотация

No American city’s history better illustrates both thepossibilities for alternative racial models and the role of the law in shapingracial identity than New Orleans, Louisiana, which prior to the Civil War washome to America’s most privileged community of people of African descent. Inthe eyes of the law, New Orleans’s free people of color did not belong to thesame race as enslaved Africans and African-Americans. While slaves were“negroes,” free people of color were gensde couleur libre, creoles of color, or simply creoles. New Orleans’screoles of color remained legally and culturally distinct from “negroes”throughout most of the nineteenth century until state mandated segregationlumped together descendants of slaves with descendants of free people of color. Much of the recent scholarship on NewOrleans examines what race relations in theantebellum period looked as well as why antebellum Louisiana’s gens de couleur enjoyed rights andprivileges denied to free blacks throughout most of the United States. This book, however, is less concerned with the what and why questions than with how peopleof color, acting within institutions of power, shaped those institutions in ways beyondtheir control. As its title suggests, Making Race in the Courtroom argues that race is best understood notas a category, but as a process. It seeks to demonstrate the role offree people of African-descent, interacting within the courts, in this process.

Аннотация

Аннотация

Аннотация

Аннотация

Аннотация

Documents Annex: http://www.nyupress.org/justtradeannex/index.htmlWhile modern trade law and human rights law constitute two of the most active spheres in international law, follow similar intellectual trajectories, and often feature the same key actors and arenas, neither field has actively engaged with the other. They co-exist in relative isolation at best, peppered by occasional hostile debates. It has come to be a given that pro-trade laws are not good for human rights, and legislation that protects human rights hampers vibrant international trade.In a bold departure from this canon, Just Trade makes a case for reaching a middle-ground between these two fields, acknowledging their co-existence and the significant points at which they overlap. Using examples from many of the 35 nations of the Western Hemisphere, Berta Esperanza Hernández-Truyol and Stephen J. Powell combine their expertise to examine human rights policies involving conscripted child labor, sustainable development, promotion of health, equality of women, human trafficking, indigenous peoples, poverty, citizenship, and economic sanctions, never overlooking the very real human rights problems that arise from international trade. However, instead of viewing the two kinds of law as polar and sometimes hostile opposites, the authors make powerful suggestions for how these intersections may be navigated to promote an international marketplace that embraces both liberal trade and liberal protection of human rights.

Аннотация

Аннотация