February 14, 2019

POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Thursday 2/14, I distributed 2 handouts: the Maine assisted suicide statute, and an excerpt from the same-sex marriage case, Obergefell v. Hodges. We began class by going over Brittany Maynard's article regarding her right to make the decision to die on her own terms. We then started working our way through the Glucksberg case brief, getting up to the doctors' argument that the issue has already been decided by prior cases. That's where we'll pick up next week. We saw how the Court went about defining the "right" that's being examined, and how to decide if that right is "fundamental". Along the way, we also went over the difference between a "panel" decision of the Court of Appeals, versus an "en banc" opinion.
The assignment for Tuesday 2/19 is to continue work on the Glucksberg case brief, and to read today's two handouts.



POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Thursday 2/14, I first collected the Gamble papers, and we went over them a little by discussing the first question of the assignment. I distributed three handouts for our next case: Petitioner's and Respondent's Briefs in Madison v. Alabama, and the previous Supreme Court case of Panetti v. Quarterman. We went back to the Timbs case. We discussed three ways of dealing with precedent: following, overruling, or distinguishing. We discussed how Timbs wants Austin followed, while Indiana can go with with overruling or distinguishing. We went over the three hurdles for Timbs to win (incorporation; "fine"; "excessive") and how much of the oral argument concerned the "excessive" definition, even though that issue had not been the one on which cert. was granted. We saw in the oral argument why that might have been the case: the reluctance to either open the door to an abyss (no definition of "excessive" makes sense) or to a brick wall (in rem forfeiture will never be excessive). That concludes our study of Timbs.
The assignment for Tuesday 2/19 is to read today's three handouts in Madison v. Alabama. If you are not sated, you can go on to listen to oral argument, though it's not formally assigned until next week.