Achieving social justice is one of the key challenges facing the world today scholars of political theory have long grappled with issues arising from it however, as the history of ideas shows, the concept itself has undergone much change over the centuries and there is no watertight definition of what ‘justice’ connotes in the contemporary context going beyond the existing frontiers of social justice, this unique volume aims to develop theoretical concepts able to respond to real dilemmas facing society today the author closely examines the classical social contract theory, one of the most widely accepted approaches to social justice in the western tradition she focuses in particular on the ideas of one of the greatest names in contemporary political philosophy, john rawls, whose work developed the theory to new philosophical depths and complexity nussbaum moves in a fresh direction and suggests that there is an inherent limitation within the social contract theory, even in the work of rawls—it is premised on the idea of a contract for mutual advantage among approximate equals she demonstrates that it is unable to address questions of social justice between unequal parties instead she goes on to develop a theory of social justice based on the ‘capabilities approach’, which she places generally within the tradition of ‘liberal conceptions’ the author analyses three social issues which could not be resolved, or even really addressed by traditional theories of justice—the problem of achieving justice for persons with physical and mental disability, of extending justice to all citizens of the world, and lastly the problem of doing justice in relation to the treatment of ‘non-human animals’ she helps us to think more clearly about the purpose of political cooperation and the nature of political principles—and to look to a future of greater justice for all

Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights , Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law. Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.