A leading legal scholar explores how the constitutional right to seek justice has been restricted by the Supreme Court The Supreme Court s decisions on constitutional rights are well known and much talked about. But individuals who want to defend those rights need something else as well: access to courts that can rule on their complaints. And on matters of access, the Court s record over the past generation has been almost uniformly hostile to the enforcement of individual citizens constitutional rights. The Court has restricted who has standing to sue, expanded the immunity of governments and government workers, limited the kinds of cases the federal courts can hear, and restricted the right of habeas corpus. Closing the Courthouse Door, by the distinguished legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, is the first book to show the effect of these decisions: taken together, they add up to a growing limitation on citizens ability to defend their rights under the Constitution. Using many stories of people whose rights have been trampled yet who had no legal recourse, Chemerinsky argues that enforcing the Constitution should be the federal courts primary purpose, and they should not be barred from considering any constitutional question.

Most new law is statutory law; that is, law enacted by legislators. An important question, therefore, is how should this law be interpreted by courts and agencies, especially when the text of a statute is not entirely clear. This book focuses on what judges should do once the legal materials fail to resolve the interpretive question.

Arizona Laws 101 is one of the handiest reference books you'll ever own. Written so that a person with no legal training will readily understand the principles set forth, this handbook covers the 101 laws most relevant to Arizona residents, including: landlord/tenant rights divorce jury duty consumer fraud living wills traffic laws wrongful firing lawsuits child custody/support sexual harassment business law medical malpractice . . . and much more!

One of the most significant Supreme Court cases in U.S. history has its roots in Arizona and is closely tied to the stateÕs leading legal figures. Miranda has become a household word; now Gary Stuart tells the inside story of this famous case, and with it the legal history of the accusedÕs right to counsel and silence. Ernesto Miranda was an uneducated Hispanic man arrested in 1963 in connection with a series of sexual assaults, to which he confessed within hours. He was convicted not on the strength of eyewitness testimony or physical evidence but almost entirely because he had incriminated himself without knowing itÑand without knowing that he didnÕt have to. MirandaÕs lawyers, John P. Frank and John F. Flynn, were among the most prominent in the state, and their work soon focused the entire country on the issue of their clientÕs rights. A 1966 Supreme Court decision held that MirandaÕs rights had been violated and resulted in the now-famous "Miranda warnings." Stuart personally knows many of the figures involved in Miranda, and here he unravels its complex history, revealing how the defense attorneys created the argument brought before the Court and analyzing the competing societal interests involved in the case. He considers Miranda's aftermathÑnot only the test cases and ongoing political and legal debate but also what happened to Ernesto Miranda. He then updates the story to the Supreme CourtÕs 2000 Dickerson decision upholding Miranda and considers its implications for cases in the wake of 9/11 and the rights of suspected terrorists. Interviews with 24 individuals directly concerned with the decisionÑlawyers, judges, and police officers, as well as suspects, scholars, and ordinary citizensÑoffer observations on the caseÕs impact on law enforcement and on the rights of the accused. Ten years after the decision in the case that bears his name, Ernesto Miranda was murdered in a knife fight at a Phoenix bar, and his suspected killer was "Mirandized" before confessing to the crime. Miranda: The Story of AmericaÕs Right to Remain Silent considers the legacy of that case and its fate in the twenty-first century as we face new challenges in the criminal justice system.