POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Friday 5/5, I first talked about two Supreme Court cases about personal jurisdiction, McIntyre v. Nicastro (British manufacturer) and Walden v. Fiore (Georgia police). We turned back to subject matter jurisdiction. We reviewed the bases of federal court jurisdiction: federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. Finally, we went over the diversity case of St. James v. Coinmach.
Exam #2 will be Monday 5/8 from 8:45 - 10:00, open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, be sure to email me by 8:00pm on Sunday with your specific requests.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 5/5, I distributed one handout, a set of short articles about Trump's executive order regarding enforcement of the Johnson amendment. We then had our debate about three views of how Locke v. Davey should impact the current Trinity Lutheran case: follow Locke, distinguish Locke, or overrule Locke.
Exam #2 will be Monday 5/8 from 1:30 - 2:45, open-book and open-note. If you are missing any handouts, be sure to email me by 8:00pm on Sunday with your specific requests.
Friday, May 5, 2017
Monday, May 1, 2017
May 1, 2017
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Monday 5/1, I handed back the Gaeth case briefs, as well as the Comment Key to my comments. We then discussed timing for Exam #2. Without objection, the timing for that exam will be 8:45-10:00 (not starting at 8:00, but rather starting at 8:45). We went back to subject matter jurisdiction, and discussed the case handed out last time, V.L. v. E.L. That case decided the meaning of the federal constitutional requirement of full faith and credit in the context of the Georgia view of subject matter jurisdiction. We moved then to personal jurisdiction. I outlined my view (as opposed to the textbook's view) of the methods by which a state asserts jurisdiction over a person: domicile of the defendant; service of process within the state; consent; and minimum contacts. We then went over the internet personal jurisdiction case of Swoboda v. Parody. On Friday I plan to start with a recent SCOTUS case regarding personal jurisdiction.
We have no class on Wednesday 5/3 (Maine Day). The assignment for Friday 5/5 is to read in the text through p. 141 (including St. James v. Coinmatch).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 5/1, we discussed timing for Exam #2. The timing for that exam on Monday 5/8 will be 1:30-2:45. I talked about an opinion of the Eighth Circuit last week, U.S. v. Anderson, in which that court ruled against a religious objector to the federal laws against the distribution of heroin. We reviewed the relationship between the Smith case, RFRA, and Boerne v. Flores. We reviewed the facts of Locke v. Davey, and discussed the concept of "play in the joints" (when state action in favor of religion is allowed under the Establishment Clause, but the state is not required under the Free Exercise Clause to extend a benefit to religion.
We have no class on Wednesday 5/3 (Maine Day). The assignment for Friday 5/5 is to review Locke v. Davey and the briefs in Trinity Lutheran. The plan for Friday's class is that students can choose one of three positions to defend regarding Trinity Lutheran: Locke should be followed; Locke should be distinguished; or Locke should be overruled. We'll try to have a debate in class revolving around those three positions.
In class today, Monday 5/1, I handed back the Gaeth case briefs, as well as the Comment Key to my comments. We then discussed timing for Exam #2. Without objection, the timing for that exam will be 8:45-10:00 (not starting at 8:00, but rather starting at 8:45). We went back to subject matter jurisdiction, and discussed the case handed out last time, V.L. v. E.L. That case decided the meaning of the federal constitutional requirement of full faith and credit in the context of the Georgia view of subject matter jurisdiction. We moved then to personal jurisdiction. I outlined my view (as opposed to the textbook's view) of the methods by which a state asserts jurisdiction over a person: domicile of the defendant; service of process within the state; consent; and minimum contacts. We then went over the internet personal jurisdiction case of Swoboda v. Parody. On Friday I plan to start with a recent SCOTUS case regarding personal jurisdiction.
We have no class on Wednesday 5/3 (Maine Day). The assignment for Friday 5/5 is to read in the text through p. 141 (including St. James v. Coinmatch).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 5/1, we discussed timing for Exam #2. The timing for that exam on Monday 5/8 will be 1:30-2:45. I talked about an opinion of the Eighth Circuit last week, U.S. v. Anderson, in which that court ruled against a religious objector to the federal laws against the distribution of heroin. We reviewed the relationship between the Smith case, RFRA, and Boerne v. Flores. We reviewed the facts of Locke v. Davey, and discussed the concept of "play in the joints" (when state action in favor of religion is allowed under the Establishment Clause, but the state is not required under the Free Exercise Clause to extend a benefit to religion.
We have no class on Wednesday 5/3 (Maine Day). The assignment for Friday 5/5 is to review Locke v. Davey and the briefs in Trinity Lutheran. The plan for Friday's class is that students can choose one of three positions to defend regarding Trinity Lutheran: Locke should be followed; Locke should be distinguished; or Locke should be overruled. We'll try to have a debate in class revolving around those three positions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)