Philip Hamburger’s Law and Judicial Duty traces the early history of what is today called "judicial review." The book sheds new light on a host of misunderstood problems, including intent, the status of foreign and international law, the cases and controversies requirement, and the authority of judicial precedent. The book is essential reading for anyone concerned about the proper role of the judiciary.

“Hamburger argues persuasively that America has overlaid its constitutional system with a form of governance that is both alien and dangerous.” —Law and Politics Book Review While the federal government traditionally could constrain liberty only through acts of Congress and the courts, the executive branch has increasingly come to control Americans through its own administrative rules and adjudication, thus raising disturbing questions about the effect of this sort of state power on American government and society. With Is Administrative Law Unlawful?, Philip Hamburger answers this question in the affirmative, offering a revisionist account of administrative law. Rather than accepting it as a novel power necessitated by modern society, he locates its origins in the medieval and early modern English tradition of royal prerogative. Then he traces resistance to administrative law from the Middle Ages to the present. Medieval parliaments periodically tried to confine the Crown to governing through regular law, but the most effective response was the seventeenth-century development of English constitutional law, which concluded that the government could rule only through the law of the land and the courts, not through administrative edicts. Although the US Constitution pursued this conclusion even more vigorously, administrative power reemerged in the Progressive and New Deal Eras. Since then, Hamburger argues, administrative law has returned American government and society to precisely the sort of consolidated or absolute power that the US Constitution—and constitutions in general—were designed to prevent. With a clear yet many-layered argument that draws on history, law, and legal thought, Is Administrative Law Unlawful? reveals administrative law to be not a benign, natural outgrowth of contemporary government but a pernicious—and profoundly unlawful—return to dangerous pre-constitutional absolutism.

This is a compendium of administrative law and judicial review in Papua New Guinea. In this book the author precisely recounts the history of the development of administrative law and judicial review in England and some other common law jurisdictions. The main theme of the book is, however, devoted to judicial review in Papua New Guinea. The practice and procedure for appealing from the decision of the National Court in judicial review are unique and onerous. This book evaluates them in detail to give the readers a complete sense of reference. The interlocutory procedures encapsulated in this book are also relevant for any proceeding before the courts. At the end of various chapters, the author makes some insightful and thought-provoking commentaries on gaps found in judicial review. The book is an authoritative text for lawyers, law students, academia, judicial officers and other interested persons alike. It is a must read for lawyers and law students who seek to be familiar with the often cumbersome judicial review procedures and practices. For students and scholars in other disciplines who aim to learn and abreast themselves of how administrative law affects administrative action and public policy, this book is a perfect choice. The book dissects complex administrative law concepts and enables lay persons, including those in the public service, to fully understand and apply them. The book is a valuable resource material for the Pacific Island countries like Fiji, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands, who have adopted the common law legal systems similar to Papua New Guinea. BOOK REVIEWS “The author collates, culls and compiles one important material for use by judicial officers and practitioners in the area of judicial review.” – Leslie Mamu, LL.B, Acting Public Solicitor, Papua New Guinea, 18 February 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “This welcome new book by Christopher Karaiye is essential reading for all lawyers practising in the busy area of Judicial Review in PNG and also students of the topic. It is a well-researched and presented work and will be a worthy addition to my administrative law library.” – Terry Lambert, LL.B, LL.M, Barrister (Queensland, Australia), Lawyer (PNG), Solicitor (England & Wales), 7 June 2018, Brisbane, Australia “The book “Administrative Law and Judicial Review in Papua New Guinea” is a must read for lawyers and public alike involved in the judicial review of administrative decisions. The book contains a comprehensive guide to an increasingly important yet quite complex area of law. The author draws from his own experience and research to make this important contribution to the development of Papua New Guinea’s expanding judicial review jurisprudence. This work is essential reading to understand the nuances involved in this area of law.” – Dr Vergil Narokobi, LL.B, LL.M, Ph.D, Counsel for the Papua New Guinea Ombudsman Commission & President of Papua New Guinea Law Society, 25 June 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “This work is of very high quality and would be a very valuable tool for judges, magistrates, lawyers, the academia, and people in decision-making positions in the public and the private sectors. I recommend the book to them. I am impressed with your comprehensive use of local case precedents and in-depth knowledge of the topics.” – Honourable Sir Gibbs Salika, KBE CSM OBE, Deputy Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea (as he then was), 4 July 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “An extensive, thought-provoking and easy to read compendium that makes accessible the law of Papua New Guinea on the topic of judicial review in its many guises.” – Emeritus Professor Tony Angelo (Victoria University of Wellington), QC, 7 October 2018, Wellington, New Zealand

A powerful dissection of one of the fundamental problems in American governance today: the clash between presidents determined to redirect the nation through ever-tighter control of administration and an executive branch still organized to promote shared interests in steady hands, due deliberation, and expertise. President Trump pitted himself repeatedly against the institutions and personnel of the executive branch. In the process, two once-obscure concepts came center stage in an eerie faceoff. On one side was the specter of a "Deep State" conspiracyadministrators threatening to thwart the will of the people and undercut the constitutional authority of the president they elected to lead them. On the other side was a raw personalization of presidential power, one that a theory of "the unitary executive" gussied up and allowed to run roughshod over reason and the rule of law. The Deep State and the unitary executive framed every major contest of the Trump presidency. Like phantom twins, they drew each other out. These conflicts are not new. Stephen Skowronek, John A. Dearborn, and Desmond King trace the tensions between presidential power and the depth of the American state back through the decades and forward through the various settlements arrived at in previous eras. Phantoms of a Beleaguered Republic is about the breakdown of settlements and the abiding vulnerabilities of a Constitution that gave scant attention to administrative power. Rather than simply dump on Trump, the authors provide a richly historical perspective on the conflicts that rocked his presidency, and they explain why, if left untamed, the phantom twins will continue to pull the American government apart.

Winner of the Scribes Book Award “As brilliantly imaginative as it is urgently timely.” —Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Harvard Law School “At no time more than the present, a defense of expertise-based governance and administration is sorely needed, and this book provides it with gusto.” —Frederick Schauer, author of The Proof A highly original framework for restoring confidence in a government bureaucracy increasingly derided as “the deep state.” Is the modern administrative state illegitimate? Unconstitutional? Unaccountable? Dangerous? America has long been divided over these questions, but the debate has recently taken on more urgency and spilled into the streets. Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue that the administrative state can be redeemed so long as public officials are constrained by morality and guided by stable rules. Officials should make clear rules, ensure transparency, and never abuse retroactivity, so that current guidelines are not under constant threat of change. They should make rules that are understandable and avoid issuing contradictory ones. These principles may seem simple, but they have a great deal of power. Already, they limit the activities of administrative agencies every day. In more robust form, they could address some of the concerns of critics who decry the “deep state” and yearn for its downfall. “Has something to offer both critics and supporters...a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate over the constitutionality of the modern state.” —Review of Politics “The authors freely admit that the administrative state is not perfect. But, they contend, it is far better than its critics allow.” —Wall Street Journal