No description available.

This study investigated the role of different leadership styles within Iran and how such leadership changes influenced Iranian foreign policy. The study utilized event-data analysis of Iranian history and current events and discussed the role of realist and idealist to the development of Iran into the regional power it is today as well as how Western relations played a role in developing Iranian foreign policy, particularly with regard to its nuclear development. The main body of the study drew from the dynamics within Iran, its relations with the West, relations with Israel, and relations with other foreign powers. The event-data analysis also took into account the political and socioeconomic stability and conditions within Iran as it would readily influence the foreign policy-making within the nation. The first part of the study analyzed Iranian society under the Shah and the under the revolutionary guidance of the Ayatollah Khomeini; the second part analyzed the post-Khomeini period in Iran. In addition to reviewing the role of different revolutionary leadership styles within Iran, this study considers the role that Iranian-Western relations have played in Iranian policy-making. Further, this study considers the tumultuous role that nuclear development has had in Iran's foreign relations. Findings showed that there is a relationship between Western presence in the Middle East and growing aggression by Iranian leadership. Moreover, the study demonstrates that the role of revolutionary leadership styles is critical in accessing the manner in which foreign policy decisions are made. The study found that the role of Islam in Iranian politics has brought much contention but found that in the post-Khomeini years, it has not been the central reason for policy decisions. Recommendations were made for the continued study of the role of nuclear development in Iranian-Western relations as this study was able to find some evidence of it having some level of relevance. Additionally, recommendations were made that additional research be conducted with regard to the role of Islam in shaping Iranian foreign policy in the Post-Khomeini era.

No description available.

This dissertation explores the intellectual and legal history of presidential administration — that is, the president’s ability to direct the operations of the administrative state. The dissertation argues that presidential administration was closely connected to changing ideas about how to realize democratic government. It shows how, in the late 19th and early 20th century, the presidency acquired the institutions that lay the foundations for executive control of administration. This was a deliberate reform project, driven by ideas about what would make government responsible. The dissertation tells this story by tracking transformations in democratic thought and law through attention to court cases and scholarship, among other genres, and looks at both published and archival sources. It draws on methods from legal history, intellectual history, and American Political Development, and occasionally makes use of an Atlantic perspective. Besides historians, law professors, and political scientists, it may be of interest to scholars of the presidency, public administration, and analysts of current legal debates about presidential power and administration.

The presidential pardon power is an oft-overlooked political institution that seems to be perceived as being innocuous and irrelevant to larger political concerns. This research examines the pardons issued by President Donald J. Trump in an effort to evaluate whether they align with constitutional expectations regarding the use of this unrestricted presidential power. Dr. Jeffrey Crouch, a leading scholar on the subject, has demonstrated that the pardon power was intended to be used as a disinterested act of grace or an act in the public interest. A close survey of President Trump’s use of this power shows that many of his pardons do not meet these standards. Instead, President Trump often used pardons to protect political allies or favor personal friends. In doing so, Mr. Trump derogated from the Constitution and elevated allies and friends above the rule of law. The implications of this usage for American democracy are spelled out.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.