brings his background as an assistant attorney general and as a scholar in moral and political philosophy to this important work' on the American jury. 2 As its subtitle only partially suggests, the book is an analysis of the way in which the different political ideals that the institution of the jury embodies, and which serve as justifications for the jury trial, stand in tension with one another. The book's unity stems from an argument for the paramount importance in different contexts of the ideal of "democratic deliberation," which involves the effort, by jurors of different backgrounds and perspectives, to reach consensus through discussion and debate. In particular, Abramson stresses the superiority of this ideal to a competing ideal, if it can be called that, under which individual jurors form alliances based on, and

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract