April 23, 2015

POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 4/23, I distributed one handout, my version of the Schroeder case brief. We went over that case brief, concluding with the question of what options Schroeder might still have for the pursuing the case. I plan to grade the case briefs this weekend, and return them on Tuesday. After finishing Schroeder, we went over the handout from last time, the Maine statute regarding adoption, and we saw how Maine dealt with the language that limited adoptions here to husband and wife. I will start on Tuesday with the 2011 5th Circuit case about same-sex adoption, as well as the Obergefell Supreme Court case that will be argued on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 4/28 is to read in the text through p. 135 (Cheap Escape and Swoboda).



POS 383 AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
In class today, Thursday 4/23, I distributed two handouts: Assignment #2, (reproduced below), and and Article about Congressional decision-making in foreign policy. We went over the requirements of the assignment, and also talked briefly about broad policy-making questions in Congressional assertion of foreign-policy decisions. We then dove back into the Zivotofsy oral argument, getting to p. 41. We will pick up at that point on Tuesday. The assignment for Tuesday 4/28 is to begin work on the Zivotofsky paper, due Thursday 4/30.

Assignment due Thursday, April 30, 2015

This assignment has two parts.

I. As we have gone through the Zivotofsky oral argument, it seems probable that Justice Kennedy will be casting a key vote in the case. So, the first part of this assignment will focus on Kennedy’s participation in that oral argument.

Here is an index to the oral argument for Kennedy: (the format is page:line) (I’ve edited out references to Kennedy that don’t reflect his questions):
Kennedy 3:20 5:6 18:9 19:4 22:17,21 28:16,23 36:5 42:20 43:9 44:15
(also note 43:21--this is Roberts, so don’t analyze it, but I think it’s helpful in understanding Kennedy).

Here’s what I want: for each of Kennedy’s 10 questions or comments above, explain what the point was that Kennedy was trying to make (in plain, clear simple English), and then what this might indicate about which side he thinks should win, and why.

Here’s an example of the format that I’m looking for, based on a Ginsburg question:

At 6:6, Ginsburg was telling Lewin that Lewin had taken her entire argument out of the law’s context, because the entirety of the law made clear that Congress was asserting that the U.S. recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This indicates that Ginsburg sees the law as asserting the U.S. position on the borders of Israel, and not simply as an exercise of Congressional authority over passports. Presumably she thinks the President, and not Congress, has power over the U.S. position on the borders that the U.S. recognizes. This indicates that she thinks Kerry should win.

So what I’m looking for is 10 paragraphs of roughly that length.

II.
The second part of the paper asks how you think the case should come out (not a prediction, but your own analysis). Analyze this not as a foreign policy question (is it good policy for Congress to pass such a law, or the President to resist it), but as a matter of constitutional power: 1) is this law a constitutional exercise of Congress’s authority over passports and their use as identification and 2) if the law is best viewed as an assertion by Congress that it can recognize borders over Presidential objections, does Congress have the power, under the constitution, to make such a law? Do the cases from the text shed any light on the question? Is the language of Curtiss-Wright helpful, or is it mere dictum?

I foresee this section of the paper taking about one page.

The assignment will be graded on the content and analysis contained in your paper. The paper will also be graded on how well you write English, and how clearly you organize your thoughts. I like short clear sentences better than long complicated ones. I like correct grammar.

Please make two copies of your paper, 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 assignment. 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 4/30, you should still e-mail me your assignment by the beginning of class time. If you do that, you will not have any grade deducted from your grade for the outline. 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.

The work should be entirely your own, with no collaboration or plagiarism. Do not show your paper to anyone. Do not look at anyone else’s paper. See the syllabus regarding plagiarism and collaboration.

IMPORTANT: If you e-mail your assignment to me, I will reply to confirm that I have received your assignment. If you do not get a reply, then I have not received the assignment.