Posts for April 15,
2016
These are the posts
that are accumulated in our newsletter which goes out every 4-6 days during the
school year. The posts are organized by the major units in our Con Law (5th ed.) student textbook.
I. Introduction to Law,
the Constitution, and the Supreme Court [See TOPICS 1-10 in the
5th edition of Constitutional Law] Here are some
recent articles that are relevant to this unit:
The Real Story Behind
HBO's 'Confirmation' From The NPR Reporter Who Broke The Story [Nina
Totenberg podcast on NPR, 4/14/16]: HBO's new
movie Confirmation chronicles
the intense confirmation battle for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas after
Anita Hill, a former employee, claimed he sexually harassed her. There is a
disclaimer that says this podcast is not for young ears.
How to Fix the U.S. Supreme Court Impasse [The Atlantic, 4/14/16]: Some progressives say Obama
could appoint Merrick Garland without Senate approval; Only voters can change
the situation.
Immigration at the Supreme
Court: What you need to know [CNN, 4/15/16]: In November 2014, President Barack Obama unveiled what he hoped would
be a centerpiece of his second term: executive actions meant to bypass
congressional inaction and help millions of undocumented immigrants come out of
the legal shadows in the U.S.
Scholars agree: Senate leaders don't have to consider Supreme
Court pick
[McClatchy DC, 4/14/16]: So what gives Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell the right to block Senate consideration of Judge Merrick Garland,
President Barack Obama’s pick to the Supreme Court? The U.S. Constitution, say
several congressional and legal scholars. Even dissenters acknowledge the
Senate can pretty much do what it wants.
II. Defining the Political
System: Federalism and Checks and Balances
[See TOPICS 11-15 in the 5th
edition of Constitutional Law] Here are recent articles that are
relevant to this unit:
The Abortion Map Today [Linda Greenhouse in the NY
Times, 4/14/16]: “In his smart opinion
piece last week, “A Mason-Dixon Line of Progress,” Timothy Egan noted the
“retreat to bigotry” sweeping across the old South as politicians clinging to
the past (under the banner of religious freedom) line up to authorize
discrimination against gay people. The column prompted me to think about
whether the battlegrounds in the never-ending abortion wars display a similar
geographic concentration.”
The Contraception Compromise [Slate, 4/14/16]:
Religious objectors may finally be backing down from their Obamacare
challenge. Here's why.
Connecticut judge allows Sandy Hook case to proceed
against gunmakers [Jurist,
4/15/16]: Connecticut Superior
Court Judge Barbara Bellis on Thursday denied
a motion to dismiss raised by three gun companies who are being sued by
families affected by the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre. The ten families filed the civil action against
the companies for manufacturing, distributing, and selling Bushmaster
semi-automatic AR-15 rifles, the weapon used by the Sandy Hook shooter.
The American Presidency [TOPIC 15]
The Obama Administration
Is Out Of Patience For The Supreme Court's Birth Control Tomfoolery [ThinkProgress, 4/14/16]: On Tuesday, the Justice Department filed a brief that
leaves little doubt that the administration is tired of being toyed with. Solicitor
General Donald Verrilli’s brief is written in the polite, precise, and
deferential language that any smart lawyer uses when advocating before the
justices. But it’s message is clear: the Supreme Court needs to stop jerking
the government — and thousands of American women — around.
III. The Political System: Voting and Campaigns
[See TOPICS 16-20 in the 5th edition of Constitutional Law] Here are some recent articles that are
relevant to this unit:
9 most interesting moments of the Democratic debate [Politico,
4/14/16]: Clinton and Sanders go head-to-head on crime, fracking and the Middle
East.
IV. Criminal Law and Procedure (4th,
5th, 6th, and 8th amendments) [See TOPICS 21-28 in the 5th edition of Constitutional Law] Here are some recent
articles that are relevant to this unit
Should a 76-year-old serve life for marijuana? Supreme
Court considers review of Alabama man's sentence [Birmingham News, 4/15/16]: The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday will consider whether to take up the
case of Lee Carroll Brooker, a 76-year-old Houston County man who is serving a
life without the possibility parole sentence for his 2014 conviction for
possession of a few pounds of marijuana.
V. 1st
Amendment (Speech, Religion, Press and Assembly)
[See TOPICS 29-33 in the 5th edition of Constitutional Law] Here are some recent articles that
are relevant to this unit:
Court Says Flying
Spaghetti Monster Is Not a "Religion" [“Religion Clause” blog /
Lincoln Journal Star, 4/13/16]: In Cavanaugh v. Bartelt a Nebraska federal district
court became one of the few to undertake a serious analysis of whether
"FSMism"-- the doctrine of the Flying Spaghetti Monster whose
followers are called "Pastafarians"-- qualifies as a
"religion" for purposes of RLUIPA or the 1st Amendment. You can’t make this stuff up.
You can read the decision at:
VI. 14th
Amendment, Discrimination, Privacy, Working, Citizenship & Immigration [See TOPICS 34-41 in the 5th edition of Constitutional
Law] Here are some recent articles that
are relevant to this unit:
Appeals court reverses
ruling that struck down teacher tenure [SF Chron / SJ Merc / CPR / EdSource / Jurist,
4/14/16]: The tenure laws that
provide job security for 277,000 California schoolteachers, and a target for
opponents who claim they shield incompetent instructors and victimize
low-income and minority students, were upheld Thursday by a state appeals
court. Expect an appeal.
Vergara Trial Court Decision Overturned [4/14/16]: The
California Court of Appeal overturned the trial court Judge’s ruling. It
unanimously concluded: “In sum, the evidence presented at trial highlighted
likely drawbacks to the current tenure, dismissal, and layoff statutes, but it
did not demonstrate a facial constitutional violation. The evidence also
revealed deplorable staffing decisions being made by some local administrators
that have a deleterious impact on poor and minority students in California’s
public schools. The evidence did not show that the challenged statutes
inevitably cause this impact. Plaintiffs elected not to target local
administrative decisions and instead opted to challenge the statutes
themselves. This was a heavy burden and one plaintiffs did not carry. The trial
court’s judgment declaring the statutes unconstitutional, therefore, cannot be
affirmed.” You can read the opinion at:
http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B258589.PDF
No comments:
Post a Comment