February 3, 2017

POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Friday 2/3, I distributed one handout, an excerpt from the Maine sentencing statutes. We started with a review of Roberts' dissent in Miller, and contrasted that dissent with the views of Thomas and Alito. I then discussed 4 cases that preceded Miller: Thompson v. Oklahoma, Stanford v. Kentucky, Roper v. Simmons, and Graham v. Florida. I then discussed the 2016 case of Montgomery v. Louisiana, which dealt with the issue of the retroactive application of the Miller rule. We talked about Roberts' vote in Montgomery. We also discussed how Montgomery viewed the holding of Miller.
The assignment for Monday 2/6 is to read through p. 34 (including Washington v. Glucksberg). Write out a brief of Glucksberg, though it again will not be handed in or graded. Also read today's handout of the Maine sentencing statutes.


POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 2/3, I distributed 2 handouts: my version of an outline for Snyder v. Phelps, and an excerpt from the Maine statutes regarding disorderly conduct, including demonstrations at funerals. We first reviewed the first part of the Roberts opinion in Snyder in which he set out the rules for how to determine if there's 1st amendment protection (public v. private concern), and then how to determine whether speech is a matter of public v. private concern. We picked up with the question of how that rule then gets applied in the facts of this case, looking at the content and the context of the speech. We discussed Roberts' view of whether government still may regulate here as a time,place, or manner restriction, whether there was viewpoint discrimination here, and whether the standard of outrageous conduct was sufficient as a guard of free speech. We then talked about Alito's dissent, as he seemed to disagree with both the questions that are to be asked, and the application of those questions to the facts here. We also looked at whether he disagreed with Roberts about whether the speech was in fact a matter of public concern. I talked about a case cited in the opinion, Hustler v. Falwell, in which the Court also protected the speaker (Hustler) against a jury verdict given to the target (Falwell) on the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The assignment for Monday 2/6 is to do an outline of U.S. v. Alvarez (previously assigned), following my Snyder outline as a guide to form (though your Alvarez outlines will not be handed in or graded). Also read over the Maine disorderly conduct statute, and think about whether it is constitutional in light of Snyder.