November 6, 2018

POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Tuesday 11/6, I distributed two handouts: assignment #2 (reproduced below) and the opinion you'll be outlining, Breyer's dissent in NIFLA v. Becerra. I went over the requirements of the assignment. We then talked about a recent poll that reported that one-third of college students felt that violence was justified in order to stop hate speech. We counted votes in Alvarez, and then went through the plurality opinion. We began by reviewing the flow chart of strict scrutiny, and then saw how for Kennedy, government was able to jump the compelling interest hurdle, but not the necessary and causal link hurdle. We also went over the categories of unprotected speech, and saw how Kennedy was loathe to expand that list. We saw how Breyer's concurrence disagreed with the flow chart altogether, and favoring a balancing test instead of a high hurdles/low hurdles pigeon-holing. We will begin on Thursday with the dissent in Alvarez, and then move on to the majority opinion in NIFLA.
The assignment for Thursday 11/8 is to review Alvarez and the majority NIFLA opinion, and begin work on assignment #2. In reviewing Thomas' NIFLA opinion, work out the outline for the opinion (not handed in or graded, but definitely useful for the assignment).

Assignment due at the beginning of class Thursday, November 15, 2018

The assignment is to do an outline of Justice Breyer’s dissenting opinion in NIFLA v. Becerra (also distributed to the class today).

Follow the format from the Sample Outlines that I’ve distributed, with the following clarification: Use Question only for the Roman numerals, and then Question and Answer for all the other elements. Both the questions and the answers should be complete sentences.

The structure should go like this:
Roman numeral; Capital Letter; Numbers; Lower Case Letter; Lower Case Roman Numerals.
For example:
I. (Question)
A. (Question and Answer)
1. (Question and Answer)
2. (Question and Answer)
a. (Question and Answer)
b. (Question and Answer)
i. (Question and Answer)
ii. (Question and Answer)
B. (Question and Answer)
II. (Question)

Follow the structure already provided by Justice Breyer:
Introductory paragraph
I.
A.
B.
C.
1.
2.
D.
II.

Add additional sub-elements to this as is appropriate, but don’t alter Breyer’s structure. What makes an additional sub-element appropriate? Basically, it's when Breyer is addressing a different question.

If there’s a (1), there should be a (2). If you’ve only got one thing to say, just say it without the further division.

Here’s my suggestion for the best way to proceed: First, figure out what the thought is for each paragraph. Second, group the paragraphs together in terms of what question they are addressing. Last, put the actual questions in, with the roman numerals questions as the final thing. In other words, work from smallest to largest.

The assignment will be graded on both the structure and the content of your outline. The outline 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 outline, 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 11/15, 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.

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.

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. Do not do any outside research. Just work from the handout itself. Do not troll the internet. See the syllabus regarding plagiarism and collaboration. The only source you can address for questions or feedback is me.




POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Tuesday 11/6, we first went through the Maine Hindering Apprehension statute and discussed how Ms. Mobbley might be charged. We then discussed the Holland case, both in terms of the creation of common law crimes, and then in terms of the crime of failing to report a felony. We looked at the Maine statute regarding common law crimes, and then looked at the Maine statutes that do impose a duty to report crimes or neglect in certain limited situations. We also looked at the federal statute about misprision of a felony. Then we turned to Lawrence v. Texas. We talked about the difference between the due process and the equal protection claims, the precedent of Bowers v Hardwick, and the reason for the decision to deal with due process instead of equal protection. We saw how Kennedy looked at both the description of the right asserted and the history and tradition of those restrictive laws, and found Hardwick lacking in both questions. We will pick up on Thursday with a look at the precedent relied on by Kennedy.
The assignment for Thursday 11/8 is to review Lawrence v. Texas, and to read in addition through p. 77 of the text, including Glassford v. BrickKicker.