POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/29, I distributed one handout, the Maine statutes that set the rules for, among other things, hindering apprehension. We first finished our discussion of Gregg, including the two dissenting opinions. We talked a little bit about the MLK Letter from the Birmingham Jail and the concept of uplifting or degrading human personality. We then went through the Mobbley case regarding duty to one's spouse v. duty to society. We began our look at the Maine statute by noting that Maine has no immunity for protecting one's spouse. The assignment for Tuesday 11/3 is to a)read today's statutory handout; b)read Holland (p.65), also with an eye to how Maine statutes deal with these questions; and c)read Lawrence v. Texas (through p. 72 of the text).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/29, I distributed one handout, the Maine statute regarding disturbing the peace. We reviewed Chaplinsky, and compared the Maine statute with the N.H. statute at issue in Chaplinsky. We also talked about the difference between a facial challenge to a law, versus an as-applied challenge. I then talked about a Maine Supreme Court case, State v. John W., 418 A.2d 1097, which discussed free speech, yelling at police, and the Maine disturbing the peace statute. We moved on to Cohen, and went over both the majority opinion and Blackmun's dissent. In Hill, we got only as far as going over the concept of content-neutrality, and acting out exactly what was allowed or not within the 100 ft. radius. The assignment for Tuesday 11/3 is to review Hill (previously assigned), including how the various opinions disagreed with each other. I also told the class that my tentative plan is to give an assignment on Tuesday 11/3 that would be due Thursday 11/12.
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
October 27, 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/27, I handed back the exams, and we went over them. I also distributed a handout about the present-day views of Breyer and Kennedy on capital punishment and solitary confinement. We began our discussion of Gregg v. Georgia, getting up to the justification of retribution, which is where we'll pick up on Thursday. The assignment for Thursday 10/29 is to read the handout, review Gregg, and in addition read through p. 64 of the text (Mobbley).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/27, I handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then discussed the Chaplinsky case, and the doctrines of unprotected speech and fighting words. We will begin on Thursday with the Cohen case. The additional assignment for Thursday 10/29 is to read in the text through p. 253 (Hill v. Colorado).
In class today, Tuesday 10/27, I handed back the exams, and we went over them. I also distributed a handout about the present-day views of Breyer and Kennedy on capital punishment and solitary confinement. We began our discussion of Gregg v. Georgia, getting up to the justification of retribution, which is where we'll pick up on Thursday. The assignment for Thursday 10/29 is to read the handout, review Gregg, and in addition read through p. 64 of the text (Mobbley).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/27, I handed back the exams, and we went over them. We then discussed the Chaplinsky case, and the doctrines of unprotected speech and fighting words. We will begin on Thursday with the Cohen case. The additional assignment for Thursday 10/29 is to read in the text through p. 253 (Hill v. Colorado).
October 22, 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/22, the class took exam #1. I plan to grade the exams this weekend, and hand them back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/27 is to read in the text pp. 52-59, and to read the article that I distributed today about the history of the Supreme Court opinion, Furman v. Georgia, that preceded the Gregg case.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/22, the class took exam #1. I plan to grade the exams this weekend, and hand them back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/27 is to read in the text pp. 238-244.
In class today, Thursday 10/22, the class took exam #1. I plan to grade the exams this weekend, and hand them back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/27 is to read in the text pp. 52-59, and to read the article that I distributed today about the history of the Supreme Court opinion, Furman v. Georgia, that preceded the Gregg case.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/22, the class took exam #1. I plan to grade the exams this weekend, and hand them back and go over them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/27 is to read in the text pp. 238-244.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
October 20, 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/20, we went over Suggs v. Norris from the textbook. We then contrasted the Suggs discussion of contracts implied in law with the Maine approach, found in the case of Paffhausen v. Balano, 1998 ME 47. We also looked at another example of how public policy can be used to refuse enforcement of an otherwise enforceable agreement or decree, in the international custody case of H.L.K. v. F.A.A. The assignment for Thursday 10/22 is to prepare for Thursday's exam. Use the blog to review what material we've covered in the textbook, what concepts we've covered, what handouts we've had, and what non-textbook cases we've discussed. If you find that you're missing any handouts, you must contact me by 9:00 pm on Wednesday night to let me know what you would like me to bring to class. Remember that if you are using a computer or other device for the textbook or for your notes, you must not use it to connect to the internet or to conduct any searches that you could not do with a hard copy.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/20, we first reviewed Brandenburg and how it left the law regarding the criminalization of speech. We then looked at O'Brien and Johnson, regarding conduct that is expressive. We looked at, among other concepts, the governmental interest involved. whether there was suppression of a viewpoint, narrow tailoring, and intermediate and high hurdles. The assignment for Thursday 10/22 is to prepare for Thursday's exam. Use the blog to review what material we've covered in the textbook, what concepts we've covered, what handouts we've had, and what non-textbook cases we've discussed. If you find that you're missing any handouts, you must contact me by 9:00 pm on Wednesday night to let me know what you would like me to bring to class. Remember that if you are using any computer or other device for the textbook or for your notes, you must not use it to connect to the internet or to conduct any searches that you could not do with a hard copy.
In class today, Tuesday 10/20, we went over Suggs v. Norris from the textbook. We then contrasted the Suggs discussion of contracts implied in law with the Maine approach, found in the case of Paffhausen v. Balano, 1998 ME 47. We also looked at another example of how public policy can be used to refuse enforcement of an otherwise enforceable agreement or decree, in the international custody case of H.L.K. v. F.A.A. The assignment for Thursday 10/22 is to prepare for Thursday's exam. Use the blog to review what material we've covered in the textbook, what concepts we've covered, what handouts we've had, and what non-textbook cases we've discussed. If you find that you're missing any handouts, you must contact me by 9:00 pm on Wednesday night to let me know what you would like me to bring to class. Remember that if you are using a computer or other device for the textbook or for your notes, you must not use it to connect to the internet or to conduct any searches that you could not do with a hard copy.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/20, we first reviewed Brandenburg and how it left the law regarding the criminalization of speech. We then looked at O'Brien and Johnson, regarding conduct that is expressive. We looked at, among other concepts, the governmental interest involved. whether there was suppression of a viewpoint, narrow tailoring, and intermediate and high hurdles. The assignment for Thursday 10/22 is to prepare for Thursday's exam. Use the blog to review what material we've covered in the textbook, what concepts we've covered, what handouts we've had, and what non-textbook cases we've discussed. If you find that you're missing any handouts, you must contact me by 9:00 pm on Wednesday night to let me know what you would like me to bring to class. Remember that if you are using any computer or other device for the textbook or for your notes, you must not use it to connect to the internet or to conduct any searches that you could not do with a hard copy.
Thursday, October 15, 2015
October 15, 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/15, I handed back the graded Kimball case briefs. I also handed out the Kimball Comment Key, and my version of the Kimball case brief. After briefly talking about the case briefs, I gave the class a sample test in preparation for the first exam on Thursday 10/22. We went over the kinds of questions to expect, as well as how to prepare for the exam. Use this blog to make sure that you have all of the handouts, and to review the concepts and cases that we've discussed. We then went over the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises, and imagined how a criminal prosecution in Maine against the Brineys might have gone. We began our discussion of Suggs v. Norris. The assignment for Tuesday 10/20 is to review Suggs v. Norris (previously assigned) and to begin your review for Exam #1 to be given Thursday 10/22.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/15, I gave the class a sample test in preparation for the first exam on Thursday 10/22. We went over the kinds of questions to expect, as well as how to prepare for the exam. Use this blog to make sure that you have all of the handouts, and to review the concepts and cases that we've discussed. We then reviewed both the majority and the dissent of Gitlow in terms of the clear and present danger test, words as incitement, and incorporation. We talked about the intervening cases discussed in the text, and then went over all of the opinions in Dennis. Finally, we saw how Brandenburg resolved the years of controversy. The assignment for Tuesday 10/20 is to read in the text through p. 238 (including O'Brien and Johnson) and to begin your review for Exam #1 to be given Thursday 10/22.
In class today, Thursday 10/15, I handed back the graded Kimball case briefs. I also handed out the Kimball Comment Key, and my version of the Kimball case brief. After briefly talking about the case briefs, I gave the class a sample test in preparation for the first exam on Thursday 10/22. We went over the kinds of questions to expect, as well as how to prepare for the exam. Use this blog to make sure that you have all of the handouts, and to review the concepts and cases that we've discussed. We then went over the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises, and imagined how a criminal prosecution in Maine against the Brineys might have gone. We began our discussion of Suggs v. Norris. The assignment for Tuesday 10/20 is to review Suggs v. Norris (previously assigned) and to begin your review for Exam #1 to be given Thursday 10/22.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/15, I gave the class a sample test in preparation for the first exam on Thursday 10/22. We went over the kinds of questions to expect, as well as how to prepare for the exam. Use this blog to make sure that you have all of the handouts, and to review the concepts and cases that we've discussed. We then reviewed both the majority and the dissent of Gitlow in terms of the clear and present danger test, words as incitement, and incorporation. We talked about the intervening cases discussed in the text, and then went over all of the opinions in Dennis. Finally, we saw how Brandenburg resolved the years of controversy. The assignment for Tuesday 10/20 is to read in the text through p. 238 (including O'Brien and Johnson) and to begin your review for Exam #1 to be given Thursday 10/22.
Thursday, October 8, 2015
October 8 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/8, I collected the Kimball case briefs, and we went over them. I plan to grade them this weekend, and return them when we next meet on Thursday 10/15. I also told the class of my plan to have our first exam on Thursday 10/22. After finishing our discussion of Kimball, we dove back into the Katko case, looking specifically at the types of authority relied on by the Iowa Supreme Court. We looked at primary authority versus secondary authority, mandatory versus persuasive authority, and following versus distinguishing authority. When we resume next Thursday, we will go over overruling versus disagreeing with authority, as well as looking at the view of the dissenting Justice in Katko. Then we'll look at the Maine criminal statute previously distributed to the class that sets the rules for defense of premises. The additional assignment for Thursday 10/15 is to read and prepare to discuss through the end of Chapter 1 of the text (including Suggs v. Norris).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/8, we discussed Schenck, Abrams and Gitlow. We looked at some recurrent themes that ran through the cases: the outlawing of words versus of actions; the substantive evil sought to be avoided by the law; how likely it is that the substantive evil would be brought about by the words; how imminently the evil would happen; whether the circumstances involve times of war; and whether the objection by the defendant is an evidentiary objection or a legal one. We searched (mainly in vain) for consistency in terms of the Court opinions overall, as well as simply within the opinions of Holmes. The assignment for Thursday 10/15 is to read in the text through p. 225 (including Dennis and Brandenburg). I also announced that my plan is to give the class Exam #1 on Thursday 10/22.
In class today, Thursday 10/8, I collected the Kimball case briefs, and we went over them. I plan to grade them this weekend, and return them when we next meet on Thursday 10/15. I also told the class of my plan to have our first exam on Thursday 10/22. After finishing our discussion of Kimball, we dove back into the Katko case, looking specifically at the types of authority relied on by the Iowa Supreme Court. We looked at primary authority versus secondary authority, mandatory versus persuasive authority, and following versus distinguishing authority. When we resume next Thursday, we will go over overruling versus disagreeing with authority, as well as looking at the view of the dissenting Justice in Katko. Then we'll look at the Maine criminal statute previously distributed to the class that sets the rules for defense of premises. The additional assignment for Thursday 10/15 is to read and prepare to discuss through the end of Chapter 1 of the text (including Suggs v. Norris).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/8, we discussed Schenck, Abrams and Gitlow. We looked at some recurrent themes that ran through the cases: the outlawing of words versus of actions; the substantive evil sought to be avoided by the law; how likely it is that the substantive evil would be brought about by the words; how imminently the evil would happen; whether the circumstances involve times of war; and whether the objection by the defendant is an evidentiary objection or a legal one. We searched (mainly in vain) for consistency in terms of the Court opinions overall, as well as simply within the opinions of Holmes. The assignment for Thursday 10/15 is to read in the text through p. 225 (including Dennis and Brandenburg). I also announced that my plan is to give the class Exam #1 on Thursday 10/22.
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
October 6, 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 10/6, I distributed one handout, my version of the Katko v. Briney case brief. We spent most of the class going over aspects of the Kimball case brief, due Thursday. We went over proper citation form for Maine Supreme Court decisions after 1996, including Kimball. We talked about the difference between evidence offered for impeachment, versus evidence offered for the truth of the statement (substantive evidence). We talked about review de novo by the appellate court, versus review for clear error or for abuse of discretion. We also went over the difference between an objective versus a subjective standard for judging circumstances. We went over the issues in Kimball, both their number and their substance. We reviewed the format for the issues, and talked about what "facts" are. After this discussion, we finished up our review of the Katko (spring gun) case brief (though not of the case itself). The assignment for Thursday 10/8 is to finish up work on your Kimball case brief, due at the beginning of class. (If you cannot be in class, remember to email your case brief to me by the beginning of class, and make sure that you get a confirmation from me.) On Thursday we will also go over the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises, and the kinds of authority cited in Katko.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/6, I distributed three handouts: my version of the Hobby Lobby outline; a comment key to the numbered comments that I made on some outlines; and the 1918 Sedition Act. I handed back the Hobby Lobby outlines, and we discussed them a little. We returned briefly to Kim Davis and reviewed the part of the Preliminary Injunction that discussed her claim under the Kentucky RFRA, especially the existence of a substantial burden. We then began our discussion of free speech. We discussed the scope of the free speech protection regarding prior restraints versus punishment after the fact, and saw what Holmes in Schenck had to say about that. We looked at the special circumstance of war, and how it affects free speech protections. We went over three theories of why free speech guarantees are justified in the first place. We looked at the language of the Sedition Act under which Schenck was convicted. Finally, we looked at how close to success the incitement must be in order to remove it from the protections of the First Amendment. On Thursday, we will finish our discussion of Schenck. The assignment for Thursday 10/8 is to review Schenck and Abrams, previously assigned) and to read in addition Gitlow (through p. 212).
In class today, Tuesday 10/6, I distributed one handout, my version of the Katko v. Briney case brief. We spent most of the class going over aspects of the Kimball case brief, due Thursday. We went over proper citation form for Maine Supreme Court decisions after 1996, including Kimball. We talked about the difference between evidence offered for impeachment, versus evidence offered for the truth of the statement (substantive evidence). We talked about review de novo by the appellate court, versus review for clear error or for abuse of discretion. We also went over the difference between an objective versus a subjective standard for judging circumstances. We went over the issues in Kimball, both their number and their substance. We reviewed the format for the issues, and talked about what "facts" are. After this discussion, we finished up our review of the Katko (spring gun) case brief (though not of the case itself). The assignment for Thursday 10/8 is to finish up work on your Kimball case brief, due at the beginning of class. (If you cannot be in class, remember to email your case brief to me by the beginning of class, and make sure that you get a confirmation from me.) On Thursday we will also go over the Maine statute regarding use of force in defense of premises, and the kinds of authority cited in Katko.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 10/6, I distributed three handouts: my version of the Hobby Lobby outline; a comment key to the numbered comments that I made on some outlines; and the 1918 Sedition Act. I handed back the Hobby Lobby outlines, and we discussed them a little. We returned briefly to Kim Davis and reviewed the part of the Preliminary Injunction that discussed her claim under the Kentucky RFRA, especially the existence of a substantial burden. We then began our discussion of free speech. We discussed the scope of the free speech protection regarding prior restraints versus punishment after the fact, and saw what Holmes in Schenck had to say about that. We looked at the special circumstance of war, and how it affects free speech protections. We went over three theories of why free speech guarantees are justified in the first place. We looked at the language of the Sedition Act under which Schenck was convicted. Finally, we looked at how close to success the incitement must be in order to remove it from the protections of the First Amendment. On Thursday, we will finish our discussion of Schenck. The assignment for Thursday 10/8 is to review Schenck and Abrams, previously assigned) and to read in addition Gitlow (through p. 212).
Thursday, October 1, 2015
October 1. 2015
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 10/1, I distributed 3 handouts: assignment #1 (reproduced below) due 10/8; the Kimball opinion that you'll be briefing; and the Maine criminal statute regarding defense of premises.
We began class with a discussion of Kimball, which involves both the Maine Rules of Evidence about hearsay, and the 6th Amendment's confrontation clause. We then went over the Speelman hypotheticals that I had distributed on Tuesday. Finally, we started working our way through the Katko case brief. We got through the appellant's contentions, so we'll start with the issues when we pick up on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/6 is to review Katko and your case brief of the case; read the Maine statutory handout regarding defense of premises, and think about Briney's liability under Maine law; and begin work on your Kimball case brief.
Assignment due Thursday October 8th, 2015
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of State v. Kimball, 2015 ME 67, 117 A.3d 585.
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on. Remember that the purpose of the brief is to be useful. Check your holdings to make sure that they give the most useful rules possible. Mere conclusory facts just tell us who won and who lost, but not what circumstances determine the winner and loser.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that, after the “Issue” is composed, the “Facts” 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 specific 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 10/8, 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. Do not show your work to anyone else; do not look at anyone else’s work.
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 the assignment.
If you weren't in class, you can access the Kimball case by going to the Maine Supreme Court opinion website-
http://courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/publishedopinions.shtml
and then scroll down to and select May 2015 Opinions, State v. Kimball, 2015 ME 67.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/1, I collected the Hobby Lobby outlines, and we went over those outlines, including both the issues decided by Alito, and those not decided. We also discussed Ginsburg's dissent. At the end of class, I also finished up the Boerne outline regarding Congressional power to impose RFRA on the states. I plan to grade the Hobby Lobby outlines this weekend, and to return them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/6 is to read and prepare to discuss pp. 197-205 of the text.
In class today, Thursday 10/1, I distributed 3 handouts: assignment #1 (reproduced below) due 10/8; the Kimball opinion that you'll be briefing; and the Maine criminal statute regarding defense of premises.
We began class with a discussion of Kimball, which involves both the Maine Rules of Evidence about hearsay, and the 6th Amendment's confrontation clause. We then went over the Speelman hypotheticals that I had distributed on Tuesday. Finally, we started working our way through the Katko case brief. We got through the appellant's contentions, so we'll start with the issues when we pick up on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/6 is to review Katko and your case brief of the case; read the Maine statutory handout regarding defense of premises, and think about Briney's liability under Maine law; and begin work on your Kimball case brief.
Assignment due Thursday October 8th, 2015
The assignment (graded) is to do a Case Brief of the case of State v. Kimball, 2015 ME 67, 117 A.3d 585.
Brief all of the issues that you determine that the Court ruled on. Remember that the purpose of the brief is to be useful. Check your holdings to make sure that they give the most useful rules possible. Mere conclusory facts just tell us who won and who lost, but not what circumstances determine the winner and loser.
Follow the format from the Sample Briefs that I’ve distributed. Note especially that, after the “Issue” is composed, the “Facts” 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 specific 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 10/8, 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. Do not show your work to anyone else; do not look at anyone else’s work.
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 the assignment.
If you weren't in class, you can access the Kimball case by going to the Maine Supreme Court opinion website-
http://courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/publishedopinions.shtml
and then scroll down to and select May 2015 Opinions, State v. Kimball, 2015 ME 67.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Thursday 10/1, I collected the Hobby Lobby outlines, and we went over those outlines, including both the issues decided by Alito, and those not decided. We also discussed Ginsburg's dissent. At the end of class, I also finished up the Boerne outline regarding Congressional power to impose RFRA on the states. I plan to grade the Hobby Lobby outlines this weekend, and to return them on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 10/6 is to read and prepare to discuss pp. 197-205 of the text.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)