POS 4604: Honors Constitutional Law II

Prof. Mark Tunick


Description: Our primary focus will be on the principles and politics underlying Supreme Court decisions concerning civil rights and civil liberties and equal protection of the law. In reading cases, we will think about the conflict between individual liberty and social justice and equality, as well as about the nature of Supreme Court adjudication. Class will be run as a combination lecture/discussion. Students should come to lecture prepared to discuss the cases scheduled for that meeting.
Requirements: Class will be run as a combination of lectures and discussion. Students are expected to participate in discussions and outline the major cases. There are two exams, two brief writing assignments, and a moot court for which students will write a legal brief or opinion.

Reading: Our text is a xeroxed course reader which should be available at the bookstore and on reserve. In addition, a pocket edition of the U.S. Constitution has been ordered. Supreme Court Oral Arguments are available for most cases. Other resources are available on the web.

Office Hours:

Schedule:

Reading listed under each class is to be done prior to that class meeting. All cases listed below should be briefed.

1. The Constitution, federalism, judicial review

2.  State Action
Rdg: Civil Rights Cases, Shelley v. Kraemer, Moose Lodge v. Irvis

3-5.  First Amendment: Free Speech
Rdg: J.S. Mill, On Liberty (excerpts); Schenck v. U.S., Whitney v. California, Cox v. New Hampshire, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, Terminiello v. Chicago, Brandenberg v. Ohio, Cohen v. California, Rust v. Sullivan; Dennis v. U.S., U.S. v. O'brien, Tinker v. Des Moines School District; Texas v. Johnson; R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul; Wisconsin v. Mitchell
Assignment One.

6.  Commercial Speech
Rdg: Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Consumer Council, Central Hudson Gas and Electric, Metromedia Inc. v. San Diego, 44 Liquormart v. Rhode Island

7.  Free Press
Rdg: Near v. Minnesota, New York Times v. U.S., U.S. v. Progressive Inc.,  Sheppard v. Maxwell, Nebraska Press Assn v. Stuart, Zurcher v. Stanford Daily
Marlise Simons, "Trial Centers on Role of Press During Rwanda Massacre," New York Times March 3, 2002 (search news/general news at lexis-nexis)
8.  Libel
Rdg: New York Times v. Sullivan; Gertz v. Robert Welch; Masson v. New Yorker Magazine

9.  Obscenity
Rdg: Roth v. U.S., Stanley v. Georgia, Paris Adult Theater v. Slaton, Miller v. California, Barnes v. Glen Theater, Erzoznick v. Jacksonville, Renton v. Playtime Theater, Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition

10-11.  Freedom of Religion
Rdg: Everson v. Board of Education; Lemon v. Kurtzman; Lee v. Weisman; Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet; Wisconsin v. Yoder; Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith; Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah

12. Midterm

13.  The Concept of Equality
Rdg: USDA v. Moreno; New Orleans v. Dukes
14.  De Jure and De Facto Discrimination
Rdg: Yick Wo v. Hopkins; Castaneda v. Partida; Washington v. Davis; Personnel Administration v. Feeney
15.  Race and Ancestry
Rdg: Plessey v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. U.S., Brown v. Board of Education, Loving v. Virginia

16.  Desegregation
Rdg: Brown II; Cooper v. Aaron; Griffin v. County School Board; Green v. County School Board; Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg; Milliken v. Bradley; Gerald Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope, chapters on desegregation.
Assignment Two.
17.  Gender
Rdg: Goesart v. Cleary, Reed v. Reed, Frontiero v. Richardson, Craig v. Boren, Mississippi Univ for Women v. Hogan, Michael M v. Superior Court, U.S. v. Virginia

18.  The poor and education
Rdg: James v. Valtierra, Harris v. McRae, San Antonio v. Rodriguez, Plyler v. Doe

19. Residency
Rdg: Shapiro v. Thompson, Martinez v. Bynum, Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County, Zobel v. Williams

20-21.  Affirmative Action
Rdg: Shelby Steele, A Negative Vote on Affirmative Action; University of California v. Bakke, Fullilove v. Klutznick, Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, Sheet Metal workers v. EEOC, U.S. v. Paradise, City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson, Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena

22-23.  Moot Court

24-25.  Abortion
Rdg: Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, Bellotti v. Baird, Maher v. Roe, Akron I, Thornburgh, Webster, Rust v. Sullivan, Planned Parenthood v. Casey

26. The right to die
Rdg: Cruzan v. Missouri

27. Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Rdg: Furman v. Georgia, McCleskey v. Kemp, Solem v. Helm, Harmelin v. Michigan

28. Procedural Due Process
Rdg: Bi-Metallic Investment Co.; Goldberg v. Kelley; Board of Regents v. Roth; Perry v. Sinderman; Arnett v. Kennedy; Goss v. Lopez

Final Exam

Moot Court
You will be given a case concerning an equal protection issue. Class will break up into small groups consisting of two opposing parties (each consisting of two attorneys), and Supreme Court Justices. Attorneys will prepare briefs to present before the Court. Justices will question the attorneys, and after deliberation, announce a decision. Attorneys will turn in a brief, Justices, an opinion. The moot court will require two sessions: one to present oral arguments, the other for deliberation and voting.

Other resources


Mark Tunick
Honors College, FAU