Spectral Evidence is a profound exploration by Gregory Pardlo, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Digest and Air Traffic. In this major collection of poetry, Pardlo's words flow seamlessly through a variety of themes, from the life of pro-wrestler Owen Hart to Tituba, the only Black woman accused during the Salem witch trials, and the MOVE organization's confrontations with Philadelphia Police.

The collection invites readers to ponder on topics such as Blackness, beauty, faith, and the impact of law. It is both cerebral and intimate, urging us to reflect on our notions of devotion and art, the criminalization and mortality of Black bodies, and the quest for justice. These themes are intricately woven into our current societal fabric, our history, and the Western literary tradition. Pardlo's poetry acts as a bridge connecting the past and present, challenging us to consider the role of art in interpreting and understanding the world around us.

A landmark, magisterial history of the trial of Japan’s leaders as war criminals—the largely overlooked Asian counterpart to Nuremberg.

In the weeks after Japan finally surrendered to the Allies, the world turned to the question of how to move on from years of carnage and destruction. For Harry Truman, Douglas MacArthur, and their fellow victors, the questions of justice seemed clear: Japan’s leaders needed to be tried and punished for the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor; shocking atrocities against citizens in China, the Philippines, Korea, and elsewhere; rampant abuses of POWs. For the Allied Forces, the trial was an opportunity to achieve justice against the defendants, but also to create a legal framework for the prosecution of war crimes and to prohibit the use of aggressive war, and to create the kind of liberal international order that would prevail in Europe. For the Japanese leaders facing trial, it was their chance to argue that their war had been waged to liberate Asia from Western imperialism.

For more than two years, lawyers for both sides presented their cases before a panel of judges from China, India, the Philippines, and Australia, as well as the US and Europe. The testimony ran from horrific accounts of brutality and the secret plans to attack Pearl Harbor to the Japanese military’s threats to destabilize the government if it sued for peace. Yet rather than clarity and unanimity, the trial brought division and complexity; these tensions and contradictions could also be seen playing out across Asia as the trial unfolded, from China’s descent into civil war to India’s independence and partition to Japan’s first successful democratic elections and the rewriting of a new, liberal constitution.

Judgment at Tokyo is a riveting story of wartime action, dramatic courtroom battles, and the epic formative years that set the stage for the Asian postwar era.

Imagine a world where your brain can be interrogated to learn your political beliefs, thought crimes are punishable by law, and your own feelings can be used against you. Where perfumers create customized fragrances to perfectly suit your emotions, and social media titans bypass your conscious mind to hook you to their products. A world where people who suffer from epilepsy receive alerts moments before a seizure, and the average person can peer into their own mind to eliminate painful memories or cure addictions.

Neuroscience has already made all of the above possible today, and neurotechnology will soon become the universal controller for all of our interactions with technology. This can benefit humanity immensely, but without safeguards, it can severely threaten our fundamental human rights to privacy, freedom of thought, and self-determination. Companies, governments, and militaries are all in: from contemplative neuroscience to consumer-based EEG technology, there have never been more ways to hack and track our brains.

The Battle for Your Brain by Nita A. Farahany dives deeply into the promises and perils of the coming dawn of brain access and alteration. Written by one of the world's foremost experts on neuroscience as it intersects with law and ethics, this highly original book offers a pathway forward to navigate the complex ethical dilemmas that neurotechnology presents, which will fundamentally impact our freedom to understand, shape, and define ourselves.

Con las sutiles herramientas de la antropología contemporánea, tanto de gabinete como de campo, Natalia Radetich se lanzó a la jungla de concreto para conocer desde dentro la mecánica por la que Uber, quizá la más emblemática de las aplicaciones para el transporte de pasajeros, crea sus mensajes para convencer —y mantener enganchados— a conductores y usuarios, y para, con total descaro, eludir su responsabilidad fiscal y patronal. Escrito con rigor y sagacidad, ricamente documentado y nutrido de observaciones en el terreno, este libro desmenuza los elementos de un novedoso fenómeno que está ocurriendo delante de nosotros, lo mismo en la movilidad, el reparto de alimentos o la mensajería: la uberización del trabajo. En ese escenario despiadado ha surgido, sin embargo, un ánimo solidario entre quienes sufren la precarización laboral.

Este libro resultará clave para entender la actual etapa del capitalismo y los mecanismos de la apropiación empresarial.

How is it that the law enforcer itself does not have to keep the law? How is it that the law permits the state to lawfully engage in actions which, if undertaken by individuals, would land them in jail? These are among the most intriguing issues in political and economic philosophy. More specifically, the problem of law that itself violates law is an insurmountable conundrum of all statist philosophies.

The problem has never been discussed so profoundly and passionately as in this essay by Frédéric Bastiat from 1850. The essay might have been written today. It applies in every way to our own time, which is precisely why so many people credit this one essay for showing them the light of liberty. Bastiat's essay here is timeless because it applies whenever and wherever the state assumes unto itself different rules and different laws from that by which it expects other people to live.

And so we have this legendary essay, written in a white heat against the leaders of 19th century France, the reading of which has shocked millions out of their toleration of despotism. This new edition from the Mises Institute revives a glorious translation that has been out of print for a hundred years, one that circulated in Britain in the generation that followed Bastiat's death. This newly available translation provides new insight into Bastiat's argument. It is a more sophisticated, more substantial, and more precise rendering than any in print.

The question that Bastiat deals with: how to tell when a law is unjust or when the law maker has become a source of law breaking? When the law becomes a means of plunder it has lost its character of genuine law. When the law enforcer is permitted to do with others' lives and property what would be illegal if the citizens did them, the law becomes perverted.

Bastiat doesn't avoid the difficult issues, such as why should we think that a democratic mandate can convert injustice to justice. He deals directly with the issue of the expanse of legislation: It is not true that the mission of the law is to regulate our consciences, our ideas, our will, our education, our sentiments, our exchanges, our gifts, our enjoyments. Its mission is to prevent the rights of one from interfering with those of another, in any one of these things. Law, because it has force for its necessary sanction, can only have the domain of force, which is justice.

More from Bastiat's The Law: Socialism, like the old policy from which it emanates, confounds Government and society. And so, every time we object to a thing being done by Government, it concludes that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of education by the State - then we are against education altogether. We object to a State religion - then we would have no religion at all. We object to an equality which is brought about by the State then we are against equality, etc., etc. They might as well accuse us of wishing men not to eat, because we object to the cultivation of corn by the State.

How is it that the strange idea of making the law produce what it does not contain - prosperity, in a positive sense, wealth, science, religion - should ever have gained ground in the political world? The modern politicians, particularly those of the Socialist school, found their different theories upon one common hypothesis; and surely a more strange, a more presumptuous notion, could never have entered a human brain. They divide mankind into two parts. Men in general, except one, form the first; the politician himself forms the second, which is by far the most important.

When it comes to the laws of attraction, there are no rules. Payton Kendall and J.D. Jameson are lawyers who know the meaning of objection. A feminist to the bone, Payton has fought hard to succeed in a profession dominated by men. Born wealthy, privileged, and cocky, J.D. has fought hard to ignore her. Face to face, they're perfectly civil. They have to be. For eight years they've kept a safe distance and tolerated each other as co-workers for one reason only: to make partner at the firm.

But all bets are off when they're asked to join forces on a major case. At first apprehensive, they begin to appreciate each other's dedication to the law—and the sparks between them quickly turn into attraction. But the increasingly hot connection doesn't last long when they discover that only one of them will be named partner. Now it's an all-out war. And the battle between the sexes is bound to make these lawyers hot under the collar.

To Kill a Mockingbird is a timeless classic that delves into the heart of a sleepy Southern town, exposing the moral dilemmas that shake its foundation. First published in 1960 and awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1961, Harper Lee's novel captures the essence of innocence and experience, kindness and cruelty, love and hatred, humor and pathos.

This compelling narrative is told through the eyes of a young girl named Scout, whose father, Atticus Finch, is a lawyer tasked with defending a black man unjustly accused of a terrible crime. Set against the backdrop of the mid-1930s Depression in Alabama, the story is a profound commentary on the virulent prejudice that plagues the town. Atticus's quiet heroism and the events that unfold challenge the conscience of a community steeped in hypocrisy and violence.

Lee herself described the book as a simple love story, yet it resonates with readers as much more—a reflection on human behavior and societal norms.