SAMPLE SYLLABUS

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

Constitutional law is the interpretation and application of the Constitution by the United States Supreme Court. This body of law is concerned largely with defining the extent and limits of governmental power and the rights of individuals and groups. This course focuses on this body of law and, therefore, involves the reading, analysis, and discussion of the selected opinions of the Supreme Court.

The student should have at minimum 6 hours of political science and should be aware that I teach this course at the junior/senior level. If you do not meet these standards, please take the course when you are further along in your studies.

Ducat, Craig, Constitutional Interpretation, 6th edition.

Domino, John. , Civil Rights and Liberties: Toward the 21st Century

On Library reserve:

Melone, Researching Constitutional Law

Domino, Sexual Harassment and the Court

Exams: Three essay exams: two "midterms" and a final. You must have a valid excuse (with documentation) to take a make-up exam.

Paper and Briefing Projects: The nature of these projects will be discussed in class.

Other Assignments: Additional case briefing assignments may be given during the course of the semester to facilitate class participation. These case briefing exercises will be worth no more than five points each and will be factored in with the appropriate exam grade.

Final grade: Based on three exams (75%) and the paper and project grade (25%)

90-100=A 80-89=B 70-79=C 60-69=D 0-59=F

POL 433 page 2

Approach:

Happily, I do not take a lecture approach in this class, but rather a modified case-method approach used in legal education. In other words, heavy class participation is the norm. Students are all expected to have read and briefed the cases before class and to be prepared to answer the professor’s questions as well as raise questions on their own. Exams will be drawn from class discussions and independent reading.

We need you! Regular attendance is required. A student will be allowed three unexcused absences in this course. Beyond that, five points will be taken off the student’s final grade for each additional unexcused absence

Plagiarizing, purchasing research papers, copying answers from another student’s exam, collaborating on briefs, or using unauthorized notes or "cheat sheets" during an exam constitutes academic dishonesty and will result in swift disciplinary action by the professor/university (Indeed, because of recent changes in intellectual property law, students also leave themselves and the university open to lawsuits). This action will take the form of failing that exam or the entire course and a letter to the Dean of Students. If you know of someone cheating, quietly and confidentially inform the professor, since the cheater’s success is unfair to you and gives that person a grade-point edge in the competitive job market that you will face upon graduation.

The First Amendment prevails in this class. However, any behavior or language in the classroom that intentionally or unintentionally disrupts the learning process and, thus, "impedes the mission of the university," will be asked to leave the class and then reported to the Dean of Students for disciplinary action in accordance with written university policy. Also, as Justice Scalia has written, there is no right to public nudity!

POL 433 page 3

OUTLINE OF COURSE:

Note: All listed cases are in abridged form in the Ducat text unless followed by a citation or the word "online". Those with citations can be found in the reporter system in the library or on-line (Findlaw or Oyez). Citations are provided in the text for those who need to consult the full opinion. Although I have not included page numbers, these cases have accompanying commentary and interpretation that are included in each chapter to help you better understand the opinions. Please read the cases in the order they appear in the book or are dated accordingly.

I. Introduction:

A. Case Briefing and Constitutional Interpretation: See Melone book chaps 1 and 4; Domino, chp. 1.

B. Online Research Methods

C. The Power of the Court

D. How the Court Decides, Ducat, pp. 28-38.

II. The Power of the President, Ducat, chp. 4:

Humphrey’s Executive v. U.S. Morrison v. Olson

Schick v. Reed Murphy v. Ford

Ex Parte Milligan Korematsu v. U.S.

Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer

U.S. v. Nixon U.S. v. Belmont

U.S. v. Curtis-Wright Export Corp. Dellums v. Bush

Clinton v. Jones (online)

Other lower court cases brought to you by the Clinton Administration

III. The Power of Congress, Ducat, chp. 3:

McCulloch v. MD Gibbons v. Ogden (see chp 5)

SC v. Katzenbach MO v. Holland

INS v. Chadha Watkins v. U.S.

Schechter Poultry Corp v. U.S., 295 U.S. 495 (1935)

City of Boerne v. Flores, 117 S.Ct. 2157 (1997)

Clinton v. City of New York (online)

IV. The Power of the Judiciary and the Application of Judicial Review,

Ducat, chps 1 & 2:

Marbury v. Madison Ex Parte McCardle

Eakin v. Raub Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee

U.S. v. Woodley Muskrat v. U.S.

POL 433 page 4

V. Freedom of Speech, Ducat chp. 11; Domino, chp. 2:

Schenck v. US Gitlow v. NY

Thomas v. Collins Dennis v. US

Brandenburg v. OH

Adderly v. FL Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc.

Cohen v. CA Tinker v. Des Moines School District

Barnes v. Glen Theatre Texas v. Johnson

RAV v. St. Paul

Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, 515 U.S. 557 (1995)

VI. Freedom of the Press, Ducat, chp. 12; Domino, chp. 3:

Near v. MN NY Times v. US

Branzburg v. Hayes Houchins v. KQED

Miller v. CA American Booksellers v. Hudnut

NY Times v. Sullivan

National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley, (online-1998)

VII. Freedom of Religion/ Freedom From Religion, Ducat, chp. 13; Domino, chp.4:

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)

Lee v. Weisman Lemon v. Kurtzman

Edwards v. Aguillard Board of Education v. Grumet

Thomas v. Indiana Wisconsin v. Yoder

Employment Division v. Smith

Agostini v. Felton, 117 S.Ct. 1997 (1997)

VIII. Equal Protection of the Laws, Ducat chp. 14, Domino, chp. 7:

Plessy v. Ferguson Sweatt v. Painter

Brown v. Board of Education Brown II

Cooper v. Aaron Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg

Regents, Univ. of CA v. Bakke City of Richmond v. Croson

Adarand Contractors v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)

Reed v. Reed, 404 US 71 (1971) Frontiero v. Richardson

Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club, 481 US 537 (1987)

Harris v. Forklift Systems, 114 S.Ct. 367 (1993)

Recent sexual harassment rulings

IX. Right to Privacy, Ducat, chp. 10; Domino, chp 6:

Griswold v. CT

Roe v. Wade

Planned Parenthood v. Casey Maher v. Roe

Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991)

Bowers v. Hardwick Cruzan v. Missouri Dept. of Health

Washington v. Glucksberg, 117 S.Ct. 2258 (1997)

Skinner v. Rail Executives, 489 US 602 (1989)