POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Thursday 2/23, the class took exam #1. When we return from spring break on Tuesday 3/13, I will hand the exams back, and we'll go over them. The additional reading assignment for Tuesday 3/13 is to read in the textbook through p. 56 (Gregg v. Georgia). I hope you have a good and safe spring break.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/23, I first discussed three Supreme Court decisions that were handed down on Wednesday. Then we talked about the FCC Petitioner's brief. I contrasted many of the arguments made by the FCC to the majority decision in the recent Supreme Court violent video games case of Brown v. EMA. For the next assignment when we reconvene on Tuesday 3/13, students can choose whether to read the ABC Respondent's Brief, or the Fox Respondent's brief. I hope you have a good and safe spring break.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
February 21, 2012
POS 282-- Introduction to American Law
In class today, Tuesday 2/21, I handed back the Degenhardt case briefs, and also my Comment Key that explained my comments. We then went over Sample Questions for Thursday's test, and finally finished up Suggs v. Norris. Thursday 2/23 will be our exam, open-book and open-note. It will cover all of the material covered in class or assigned thus far. If you will be using a computer during the test, please sit in the back row of the class. Remember that you may not connect to the internet or similar connections during the test.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Tuesday 2/21, I first discussed today grant of cert. in a University of Texas affirmative action admissions case, and also the decisions in a Miranda "custody" case and an arbitration case. We then went over the Pacifica Supreme Court opinion that was assigned for today. We discussed the various issues dealt with in the Stevens opinion, as well as the views of the concurring and dissenting Justices. The assignment for Thursday 2/23 is to read the petitioner's (FCC) brief in FCC v. Fox. You can access the brief by going to the Supreme court website; select merits briefs/ online merits briefs and from the ABA site, scroll alphabetically to FCC v. Fox and select Petitioner's Brief.
In class today, Tuesday 2/21, I handed back the Degenhardt case briefs, and also my Comment Key that explained my comments. We then went over Sample Questions for Thursday's test, and finally finished up Suggs v. Norris. Thursday 2/23 will be our exam, open-book and open-note. It will cover all of the material covered in class or assigned thus far. If you will be using a computer during the test, please sit in the back row of the class. Remember that you may not connect to the internet or similar connections during the test.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Tuesday 2/21, I first discussed today grant of cert. in a University of Texas affirmative action admissions case, and also the decisions in a Miranda "custody" case and an arbitration case. We then went over the Pacifica Supreme Court opinion that was assigned for today. We discussed the various issues dealt with in the Stevens opinion, as well as the views of the concurring and dissenting Justices. The assignment for Thursday 2/23 is to read the petitioner's (FCC) brief in FCC v. Fox. You can access the brief by going to the Supreme court website; select merits briefs/ online merits briefs and from the ABA site, scroll alphabetically to FCC v. Fox and select Petitioner's Brief.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
February 16, 2012
POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Thursday 2/16, I distributed two handouts: the Maine statute regarding illegal evictions, and my version of the Degenhardt case brief. I collected the Degenhardt briefs, and I plan on grading them this weekend and returning them on Tuesday. On Tuesday I will also go over some sample test questions for the test on Thursday 2/23. We will also finish our discussion of the Suggs case on Tuesday. The only additional reading for Tuesday 2/21 is to read pp. 50-51 of the text.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/16, we went over the Second Circuit decision in FCC v. Fox. We talked about obscenity versus indecency, broadcast versus other media, strict scrutiny, Fifth Amendment versus First Amendment, and the words which can't be said. The assignment for Tuesday 2/21 is to read the 1978 Supreme Court opinion in FCC v. Pacifica, 438 U.S. 726. You can Google the case and come up with many different publications of the text of the case. Make sure that you read all four opinions in the case, and understand the differences between them.
In class today, Thursday 2/16, I distributed two handouts: the Maine statute regarding illegal evictions, and my version of the Degenhardt case brief. I collected the Degenhardt briefs, and I plan on grading them this weekend and returning them on Tuesday. On Tuesday I will also go over some sample test questions for the test on Thursday 2/23. We will also finish our discussion of the Suggs case on Tuesday. The only additional reading for Tuesday 2/21 is to read pp. 50-51 of the text.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/16, we went over the Second Circuit decision in FCC v. Fox. We talked about obscenity versus indecency, broadcast versus other media, strict scrutiny, Fifth Amendment versus First Amendment, and the words which can't be said. The assignment for Tuesday 2/21 is to read the 1978 Supreme Court opinion in FCC v. Pacifica, 438 U.S. 726. You can Google the case and come up with many different publications of the text of the case. Make sure that you read all four opinions in the case, and understand the differences between them.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
February 14, 2012
POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Tuesday 2/14, we first talked about schedules. This Thursday 2/16, the Degenhardt case briefs are due. I will return them on Tuesday 2/21. Also on Tuesday, I will go over some practice exam questions. The exam will be on Thursday 2/23 (open-book and open-note, but only your own). In class, I went over some pointers about briefing Degenhardt. One point was that the "key facts" are those that are in favor of the winning side; if you want to put the loser's facts in, a format for doing that is to use this formulation: "...when [the winner's facts} even though [the loser's facts}." We also went over the levels of review by an appellate court e.g. sufficient evidence, clear error, do novo, etc. I clarified that, even though these were part of Degenhardt, you did not have to include them in your case brief. I introduced the vocabulary of "extending" authority, which has the same side winning as in the concept of "following" authority, but extends that rule into new factual territory. We saw examples of extending authority in both Katko and Suggs. We finished up our discussion of the Maine defense of premises statute. We began our discussion of Suggs v. Norris, getting through the first two issues: whether public policy forbids the enforcement of a contract between co-habitors, and whether there was evidence that this agreement was not meretricious. We will finish Suggs on Thursday, assuming there's time left after our discussion of Degenhardt. The assignment for Thursday 2/16 is to finish the Degenhardt case brief, due at the beginning of class on Thursday.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, 2/14, I went over six cases that either have been or soon will be, argued before the Court. The class then voted, and the choice was to write the next paper on FCC v. Fox. The assignment for Thursday 2/16 is to read the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision that's under review in this case. The opinion can be found in many ways, but an easy way to find it is to start at www.scotusblog.com. At the top right of their home page there is a pull down menu for the OT11 Cases. Select FCC v. Fox. At the top of that page, there's a link to the "Opinion Below". Selecting that link takes you to the Bloomberg law publication of the Second Circuit 2010 opinion (613 F.3d 317). Read the opinion for Thursday 2/16, including following the Court's organizational outline.
In class today, Tuesday 2/14, we first talked about schedules. This Thursday 2/16, the Degenhardt case briefs are due. I will return them on Tuesday 2/21. Also on Tuesday, I will go over some practice exam questions. The exam will be on Thursday 2/23 (open-book and open-note, but only your own). In class, I went over some pointers about briefing Degenhardt. One point was that the "key facts" are those that are in favor of the winning side; if you want to put the loser's facts in, a format for doing that is to use this formulation: "...when [the winner's facts} even though [the loser's facts}." We also went over the levels of review by an appellate court e.g. sufficient evidence, clear error, do novo, etc. I clarified that, even though these were part of Degenhardt, you did not have to include them in your case brief. I introduced the vocabulary of "extending" authority, which has the same side winning as in the concept of "following" authority, but extends that rule into new factual territory. We saw examples of extending authority in both Katko and Suggs. We finished up our discussion of the Maine defense of premises statute. We began our discussion of Suggs v. Norris, getting through the first two issues: whether public policy forbids the enforcement of a contract between co-habitors, and whether there was evidence that this agreement was not meretricious. We will finish Suggs on Thursday, assuming there's time left after our discussion of Degenhardt. The assignment for Thursday 2/16 is to finish the Degenhardt case brief, due at the beginning of class on Thursday.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, 2/14, I went over six cases that either have been or soon will be, argued before the Court. The class then voted, and the choice was to write the next paper on FCC v. Fox. The assignment for Thursday 2/16 is to read the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision that's under review in this case. The opinion can be found in many ways, but an easy way to find it is to start at www.scotusblog.com. At the top right of their home page there is a pull down menu for the OT11 Cases. Select FCC v. Fox. At the top of that page, there's a link to the "Opinion Below". Selecting that link takes you to the Bloomberg law publication of the Second Circuit 2010 opinion (613 F.3d 317). Read the opinion for Thursday 2/16, including following the Court's organizational outline.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
February 9, 2012
POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Thursday 2/9, I distributed two handouts: the graded case brief assignment for next Thursday (below) and the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises. We finished out discussion of Katko v. Briney, including the views of the dissenting Justice. We then began looking at the Maine statute. We will finish looking at the requirements of that statute (making your demand before you shoot) on Tuesday. We will also take up the previously assigned Suggs v. Norris on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday February 14 is to review Suggs, and to begin work on your Degenhardt case brief.
Assignment due Thursday, February 16, 2012
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of Degenhardt v. EWE Limited Partnership, 2011 ME 23, 13 A3d. 790. The case can be found on the website of the Maine Supreme Court.
To access the case, go to
http://www.courts.state.me.us/opinions/supreme/index.html
--scroll down to “2011 Opinions”
--select 2011 ME 23 Degenhardt v. EWE Limited Partnership (2/24/2011)
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that the Facts, Issues, and Holding are copied and pasted. Everything that you put into the Fact section should appear exactly in your Issue and Holding sections as well. Your Issue and Holding sections should be identical to each other, except that the issue is a question, and the Holding is the answer to that question. Your briefs will be evaluated on the format, as well as the specific content.
Please make two copies of your brief, one to hand in at the beginning of class, and the other for you to have during class for our discussion.
You may e-mail me if you have questions about the brief. The more time that I have to answer your questions, the more likely it is that I can be helpful.
If you cannot be in class on Thursday 2/16, you should still e-mail me your brief by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the brief. If you do not, you should still contact me as soon as possible to see what options are available to you. (Generally, I do not want to accept assignments after we have discussed them in class). See the Syllabus for the class rules regarding late papers. Remember to work by yourselves; do not collaborate.
IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your brief to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If I do not reply, then I have not received your assignment.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/9, we finished our discussion of U.S. v. Jones. On Tuesday 2/14 I will resume going over the cases that are candidates for our next paper, so this should be the last day for a while without any homework for you to do.
In class today, Thursday 2/9, I distributed two handouts: the graded case brief assignment for next Thursday (below) and the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises. We finished out discussion of Katko v. Briney, including the views of the dissenting Justice. We then began looking at the Maine statute. We will finish looking at the requirements of that statute (making your demand before you shoot) on Tuesday. We will also take up the previously assigned Suggs v. Norris on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday February 14 is to review Suggs, and to begin work on your Degenhardt case brief.
Assignment due Thursday, February 16, 2012
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of Degenhardt v. EWE Limited Partnership, 2011 ME 23, 13 A3d. 790. The case can be found on the website of the Maine Supreme Court.
To access the case, go to
http://www.courts.state.me.us/opinions/supreme/index.html
--scroll down to “2011 Opinions”
--select 2011 ME 23 Degenhardt v. EWE Limited Partnership (2/24/2011)
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that the Facts, Issues, and Holding are copied and pasted. Everything that you put into the Fact section should appear exactly in your Issue and Holding sections as well. Your Issue and Holding sections should be identical to each other, except that the issue is a question, and the Holding is the answer to that question. Your briefs will be evaluated on the format, as well as the specific content.
Please make two copies of your brief, one to hand in at the beginning of class, and the other for you to have during class for our discussion.
You may e-mail me if you have questions about the brief. The more time that I have to answer your questions, the more likely it is that I can be helpful.
If you cannot be in class on Thursday 2/16, you should still e-mail me your brief by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the brief. If you do not, you should still contact me as soon as possible to see what options are available to you. (Generally, I do not want to accept assignments after we have discussed them in class). See the Syllabus for the class rules regarding late papers. Remember to work by yourselves; do not collaborate.
IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your brief to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If I do not reply, then I have not received your assignment.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/9, we finished our discussion of U.S. v. Jones. On Tuesday 2/14 I will resume going over the cases that are candidates for our next paper, so this should be the last day for a while without any homework for you to do.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
February 7, 2012
POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Tuesday 2/7, I distributed one handout, my version of the Katko v. Briney case brief. We began by finishing our discussion from last week of the Smith case. I talked about the aftermath of the Smith case in Idaho. I also discussed one Supreme Court case regarding what process is due, the school suspension case of Goss v. Lopez. I stressed that the "Issue" in my case brief format should be in the form of "Under (law) A, is there (the legal question) B, when (the circumstances are) C". We began going through the case brief for Katko, getting as far as Appellant's Contentions. We will finish Katko on Thursday. The additional assignment for Thursday 2/9 is to finish reading Chapter One of the text. Do case case brief (not handed in) of the Suggs case on p.42. Also, I plan to distribute on Thursday your first graded case brief assignment, which I plan to have due a week later, on Thursday 2/16. I also plan to give Exam #1 in the week of February 21.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Tuesday 2/7, I handed back the Hosanna-Tabor papers, and we went over them and the case some more. We also discussed a current cert. petition regarding the Catholic Church's attempt to claim First Amendment immunity from a civil charge of negligence in not removing an abusive priest. We talked about U.S. v. Jones, getting to the question of whether the placement of a GPS on the car constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. We'll continue with that discussion on Thursday, which gives you another temporary reprieve from homework (unless you'd like to read the U.S. v. Jones opinion...)
In class today, Tuesday 2/7, I distributed one handout, my version of the Katko v. Briney case brief. We began by finishing our discussion from last week of the Smith case. I talked about the aftermath of the Smith case in Idaho. I also discussed one Supreme Court case regarding what process is due, the school suspension case of Goss v. Lopez. I stressed that the "Issue" in my case brief format should be in the form of "Under (law) A, is there (the legal question) B, when (the circumstances are) C". We began going through the case brief for Katko, getting as far as Appellant's Contentions. We will finish Katko on Thursday. The additional assignment for Thursday 2/9 is to finish reading Chapter One of the text. Do case case brief (not handed in) of the Suggs case on p.42. Also, I plan to distribute on Thursday your first graded case brief assignment, which I plan to have due a week later, on Thursday 2/16. I also plan to give Exam #1 in the week of February 21.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Tuesday 2/7, I handed back the Hosanna-Tabor papers, and we went over them and the case some more. We also discussed a current cert. petition regarding the Catholic Church's attempt to claim First Amendment immunity from a civil charge of negligence in not removing an abusive priest. We talked about U.S. v. Jones, getting to the question of whether the placement of a GPS on the car constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. We'll continue with that discussion on Thursday, which gives you another temporary reprieve from homework (unless you'd like to read the U.S. v. Jones opinion...)
Thursday, February 2, 2012
February 2, 2012
POS 282--Introduction to American Law
In class today, Thursday 2/2, I distributed two handouts: an excerpt from a magazine article that discussed the failure of our Bill of Rights to commit to justice rather than fairness, and my own version of the Smith brief. I discussed two U.S. Supreme Court cases regarding the liberty interest in preserving your good name, Wisconsin v. Constantineau and Paul v. Davis. We got through the issue of whether there is a protected liberty interest here, and began the issue of exactly what process is due, and what was missing. We will finish our discussion of Smith next Tuesday. The additional assignment for Tuesday 2/7 is to read through p. 41 of the text, and to write out a case brief, (not handed in) of Katko v.Briney.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/2, I collected the Hosanna-Tabor papers, and I intend to return them next Tuesday. Also on Tuesday I will continue talking about the Jones GPS case, which leaves the class with no homework assigned. Enjoy the weekend.
In class today, Thursday 2/2, I distributed two handouts: an excerpt from a magazine article that discussed the failure of our Bill of Rights to commit to justice rather than fairness, and my own version of the Smith brief. I discussed two U.S. Supreme Court cases regarding the liberty interest in preserving your good name, Wisconsin v. Constantineau and Paul v. Davis. We got through the issue of whether there is a protected liberty interest here, and began the issue of exactly what process is due, and what was missing. We will finish our discussion of Smith next Tuesday. The additional assignment for Tuesday 2/7 is to read through p. 41 of the text, and to write out a case brief, (not handed in) of Katko v.Briney.
POS 359--The Current Supreme Court Term
In class today, Thursday 2/2, I collected the Hosanna-Tabor papers, and I intend to return them next Tuesday. Also on Tuesday I will continue talking about the Jones GPS case, which leaves the class with no homework assigned. Enjoy the weekend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)