PLSC #305 LAW AND POLICY IN CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY
Fall Term 2014 CRN17436: Online Course
Professor Joanna Vecchiarelli Scott, PhD
You may contact me via email: jscott@emich.edu . Subject line for emails to me should
include: your name, the course name and CRN number. I will try to respond within 24-48
hours excluding weekends and holidays. I will be online via iPhone, iPad and laptop. This
course is entirely online, and there are no on-campus sessions or office hours. But I urge you
to ask any questions you have as soon as possible: no question is a ‘dumb’ question.
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE COURSE: This course is primarily intended for Political
Science majors, other students interested in political science and Social Science teachers, K-12.
It will explore the unique nature of American Constitutional law and political processes, together
with the cultural values and experiences that have shaped them both. The goal of the course is to
nurture informed, active citizen/teachers through the development of critical thinking and
analytic skills focused on American Constitutional democracy as seen in the confluence of key
judicial thinking from the beginning of the Republic to today. It is not a course devoted to pure
Casebook Law.
You will be reading two books (both in paperback), a substantial paper emailed out to you by me,
some lecture material in the course shell, and a few other handouts (emailed from me).
1) The central book by Lucas Powe looks at American political evolution through the eyes of the
Judiciary from 1789 to 2008. 2) The second book is also a very recent publication on
Constitutional Law and its practical applications today by Stephen Breyer, a current Supreme
Court Justice. As Justice Breyer writes…
1
“The key lies in the Court’s ability to apply the Constitution’s enduring values to changing
circumstances…The Court must thoroughly employ a set of traditional legal tools in service of a
pragmatic approach to interpreting the law. It must understand that its actions have real world
consequences. (xiii)”
(Note again: This course is not a case-by-case law course. It’s about Constitutional Ideas and
public laws that are politically contested by the President, Congress, and the States and may
eventually wind up in the Supreme Court for final decision on their constitutionality.)
A key Resource for this course: At the Illinois Institute of Technology, ChicagoKent Law School there is a Technology/Media program explaining, analyzing and
cataloging Supreme Court cases going back years. Indeed, there are even a few
cases in the very earliest sessions of the Court in the beginning of the 19th
century. This site is invaluable in giving you both 'thumbnail' sketches of the
cases and 'deep dives.' If you are/or will be/or are thinking about being a social
science teacher you must 'bookmark' this site. If you have a tablet (iPad, etc.) all
the better because there is a free App.
The site is www.oyez.com
A second site is: www.scotusblog.com
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROFESSOR:
I am a Professor of Political Science. (http://www.joannavscott.com--a new webpage under
construction), educated at Barnard College (BA), Columbia University (MA) and the University
of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK (PhD). I came to EMU from California State University, Long
Beach in 1990 and served 6 years as Dept. Head in Political Science. I teach Political Theory and
American Government. My professional activities also include policy formation at the national
level for our professional association in Washington, D.C, The American Political Science
Association. I have recently served as APSA Council member and then as Vice President of the
Council. I am also past President of the Women's Caucus for Political Science and member of
the Standing Committee on the Status of Women in Political Science.
The focus of my published research is 20th century political ideas in the U.S. and Europe,
specifically during the periods of WWII, the Holocaust and the Cold War. My work has been
funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (5 Fellowships) and the Gilder Lehrman
Foundation.
II. MY THEMES FOR THE COURSE
1) THE AMERICAN “CONSTITUTIONAL CREED”: Liberty, Equality, Democracy and
the Role of the Supreme Court throughout history but as importantly since WWII, 9/11,
the "Great Recession"(2008-09) and the recent Boston Marathon bombing.
This course will focus on the relationship between the three branches of government and,
particularly, the way in which the Federal Courts participate in ‘making public policy’ by
making and interpreting Constitutional Law. Or, as Justice Breyer of the Supreme Court puts it,
2
we will focus on “making our democracy work.” (See: Justice Breyer in the readings assigned
below).
Ideas about Which Americans Continue to Argue
In the early 21st century American citizens are, to say the least, ambivalent about the role of the
Federal Government in their lives. Just as Americans expect the government to help them out
with things they cannot do for themselves (like fix the economy, protect their jobs, get them
affordable medical coverage, provide emergency Hurricane relief, track down Terrorists, assure
racial justice), they also want to keep their individual and group rights intact (the Bill of Rights
and the 14th Amendment). While they sense that as they need more from Washington, they have
also seen that the ‘magic lamp’ has been rubbed and the Federal ‘genie’ is now on the loose,
getting more powerful with each new piece of legislation or court decision.
Americans want, for example: choice in doctors and medical procedures like abortion, freedom
and privacy in their online/mobile communication and even the right to own a variety of guns, to
marry same-sex partners. Yet, perhaps a minority, but a loud one, doesn't even want Medicare
and Social Security to continue as publicly funded programs, or pay taxes at all, or have any
Federal regulation of the environment, of health and safety standards, or of any business
practices (even those that brought on the recent ‘Great Recession’). Another group of Americans
(also small and loud) want laws and regulations to be made at the State legislative level only,
including returning to the 19th century practice of State Legislatures electing U.S Senators
(instead of by a majority vote of the State's population). All of these examples are displayed in
the position of the "Tea Party" which is now organized nationwide as a conservative "populist"
adjunct to the Republican Party.
Many of the pros and cons of these issues will ultimately be contested in the US Court system
(local, state, and Federal) and some (actually very, very few) will make it to the US Supreme
Court. This course will look at how the Supreme Court both acts as a referee as well as ‘partners’
with the other branches of government – Federal, state and local.
Of course there are some things that all Americans insist upon -- Tea Partiers especially.
One is that the Federal Government takes care of our national defense, including policing the
borders of the United States. Particularly in the Southwestern US (but elsewhere too), there is a
growing resentment and fear of Mexican, Central and South American immigrants. And as we
have experienced n the past few months, thousands of children from Central American countries
have crossed our border and sought refuge in the US. In times of economic downturn like the
past few years, this resentment of immigrants (11-12 million undocumentedd) has spread
throughout the US even to states where they are really a tiny proportion of the population. At the
same time, Americans on the Left and Right are today at odds about the solution to this and
many other problems that must involve the Federal Government, if there is to be any "workable"
outcome. The problem of Immigration, like that of access to health care and protecting the
rights of "minorities" of sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, are core American dilemmas
involving the Federal Courts and our elected Branches of government in the role of doing for the
least among us what they cannot do for themselves.
3
These issues (despite the ‘easy rhetoric’ of politicians and pundits) are all very complicated,
uniquely so for Americans, because we are all still committed to the basic American values
of "democracy," "equal opportunity" and "liberty." These values are in fact what make
America an exceptional nation. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution became
law just after the end of the Civil War and says (to summarize)…that no State shall deny any
person due process of law or equal protection of the law, and that all people born or naturalized
in this country are citizens of the United States. As children we all learned the words of the
inscription on the Statue of Liberty "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses
yearning to breathe free…” We are learning daily that "huddled masses" applies as well to
many persons already here who are American citizens as well, but who are poor, out of work,
sick, homeless with no change of access to "equal opportunity" because the States in which they
live cannot or will not supply the remedies.
On the matter of "security the homeland" itself, the way ahead is not clear. Even in the
Post 9/11, the recent Boston Marathon ‘bombing’ world, and the NSA/Edward Snowden
surveillance issues, and now in the shooting of a young African-American man in Ferguson,
Missouri, Americans are also of two minds on the subject of the increasing power and
reach of the Federal Government: that is, how to balance the need for protection of our nation
from Jihadists (Islamic terrorists), but at the same time not surrender our Civil Rights of free
speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and all of the personal rights we celebrate as
Americans. The Congressionally mandated authority of the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and the new
Department of Homeland Security, to surveil, arrest and imprison citizens as well as and foreign
nationals alarm many Americans--conservative and liberal, Republican, Democrat and Tea
partiers. All of these new and continuing Federal powers reach down to all our home town
police forces, libraries, universities, computers and cellphones and our private lives. As you have
no doubt recently noticed in the ‘headlines’, the use of ‘Drones’ abroad as well as potentially at
home sparked a US Senate Filibuster. These are not simple problems, and as a result this will
not be a simple course --though it will not be boring!
What exactly should be the Role of Federal Law-Making and how does Judicial Review
come about?
The Obama Administration has launched more federally funded "recovery" programs than any
Administration since the New Deal of President Franklin Roosevelt. This has galvanized both
Liberals and Conservatives and as with the Roosevelt Administration sparked lots of law suits.
On the one hand, Obama has raised hopes and expectations that the Government will be a
positive, supportive power in the lives of Americans, and promised resurgence in government
support for State finances, infrastructure construction, medical care, and education. The
"bailouts" for the banking, financial and auto industries, the Stimulus Package and Congressional
passage of legislation to guarantee every American affordable medical insurance by 2014--all
were President Obama's response to the political "mandate" he thought he got after the Nov.,
2008 General Election, and the dire needs of the country. To these should be added the Military
and National Security policies put in place by the previous George W. Bush Administration
after 9/11/01, and continued almost un-changed by President Obama.
On the other hand, Americans, Tea Partiers and everyone else, are/have been scared, angry and
4
looking for answers and for help. While some expect Washington to deliver, others don’t want
Washington to deliver and see that as a ‘big government’ threat. Some applauded the banks and
auto industry ‘bailouts’; some didn’t and considered them a ‘Federal takeover’ of the private
sector businesses. Of course, if banks collapse and businesses large and small follow suit, then
there will not be new jobs, or mortgages or health insurance, or college education, etc. Many
law suits have been filed against several of these initiatives based on ‘religious beliefs,’ intrusion
on states’ rights, etc.
2) INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION AND PUBLIC POLICY
As the legal scholar, Jeffrey Toobin, has remarked in the New Yorker (9.27.10), not since the
Great Depression (1932) when Pres. Franklin Roosevelt (Democrat) confronted the Supreme
Court over his massive New Deal Programs has a president attempted to expand the ‘regulatory’
power of the Federal Government as Pres. Obama is doing in response to the Great Recession.
The irony, of course, is that Obama argues that his electoral ‘mandate’ has given him leeway to
greatly expand Federal power – i.e., “Yes we can…Change You Can Believe in,” while the
backlash against him has been significant and framed as ‘that’s not the change we voted for’ or
‘where’s the job and mortgage help we asked for?” Obama’s critics on the Right think he has
over-reached, among them Republicans and Tea Partiers (whose members overlap). Critics on
the Left, think he did not go far enough in intervening in the economy in a Keynesian fashion
(e.g., more stimuli via Federal jobs programs, grants-in-aid to states, and other policies
resembling the New Deal almost 70 years earlier.)
To touch on a number of these policy issues and their Constitutional roots, from regulation of the
economy to the rights of Americans and ‘enemy combatants,’ will be an important aspect of this
course. We will cover:
1) The origins of Federal v. State powers and early conflicts over land development and the
role of the Supreme Court in adjudicating those issues. How did ‘Judicial Review’ come
about?
2) The role of the Federal Government, particularly the Supreme Court, in interpreting the
Bill of Rights (1st ten amendments to the Constitution) and the 14th Amendment with
respect to the Civil Rights ( for example, African Americans) and Liberties (for example,
gay Americans) in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries.
3) The role of $$ in politics from its origins in the 1860s to its role in the 2012 Presidential
election (and going forward). There have been a series of legislative reforms in campaign
finance that many feel have been thwarted by the US Supreme Court. Others have
applauded these decisions as simply upholding free speech.
But you will come to understand that all sides use the language of American values – Liberty,
Equality and Democracy to explain their positions. Supreme Court Justice Breyer is a case in
point. His argument for a pragmatic approach to Constitutional interpretation (vs. an
‘Originalist’) sees the Supreme Court as both a watchdog guarding the rules of ‘checks and
balances’ that define how the President, the Congress, and the courts make and enforce policies
and, at the same time, seeing to it that their decisions do not violate the cultural bedrock of
5
‘democracy’ which sustains not only the Courts but all branches of Government. The view
opposite to Justice Breyer’s is call “originalist.’ That is the words of the Constitution should not
be re-crafted from their original meaning and direction for all modern conditions. Justice Anton
Scalia, on the current court, is a proponent of this judicial/constitutional view.
SUMMARY:
Consider this as you think about the course: There is no such thing in America as ‘small
government’ or a Federal Court system that does not need to ‘police the boundaries’ (Breyer)
between the Executive and Legislative branches and the Constitution. And there hasn’t been
since 1932, when Franklin Roosevelt re-imagined and expanded the size of government in
response to the Great Depression, the effects of World War I and the coming of World War II.
He did it by fighting the Supreme Court, and had to back down from his effort/threat to ‘pack’
the Supreme Court by adding two more members to dilute the effect of the ‘nine old men.’
III. READING, DISCUSSION AND VIEWING REQUIREMENTS:
The two books listed below must be bought (you can own ‘virtual’ copies of at least one of them)
and read; all discussion topics must be addressed online. All assignments for each Unit must be
done by the closing weekly date. While Exams can be taken anytime of the day or night, when
you log on, you have only 1 hour 15 min. Exams (3 in all) are given on the final day of the Unit.
Again, you will be able to take the exam any time you chose that day.
Course Syllabus
A. Primary Textbooks and Information Sources to be used for the Exams and for Online
Discussion assignments:
1) Stephen Breyer. Making Our Democracy Work: A judge’s view. 2010. New York. Knopf
(also Kindle edition), paperback.
2) Lucas A. Powe, Jr. The Supreme Court and the American Elite, 1798-2008, Harvard
Univ. Press, 2009, paperback
3) Howard Bunsis, PhD, CPA, Professor at EMU. “Citizens United: The Death of
Representative Government?” (This is a paper that will be distributed in PDF format by
me to each student as a framework for our Unit 2 Discussion Postings. No cost to students)
4) Discussion Sources: Reading the daily news with special emphasis on the Supreme
Court. (Especially currently because the Supreme Court has recently rendered opinions on
same-sex marriage cases and we will discuss them in Unit 3 of this course. The Court has in
the past three years ruled on an Arizona Immigration law, Campaign ($$) Finance (Our
Unit 2 Discussion in this course), Obamacare (= Affordable Health Care Act).
“Newspapers”: The New York Times is the best comprehensive news source in America
(www.nytimes.com). EMU has FREE copies of the Times available--grab them daily.
Any major City paper is good too, such as: The Detroit Free Press, The Chicago Tribune, the
Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe etc. More focused on politics exclusively, and also an
6
excellent source, is The Washington Post (washingtonpost.com). Online specialized news
sources include: Politico, the Huffington Post, the Daily Beast, Salon, Slate. For British coverage
of the US and the World: the BBC (BBC.co.uk), the Guardian newspaper (guardian.co.uk) and
Reuters news service (reuters.com).
Websites of particular Interest: www.scotusblog.com is a very good source of information
on the Supreme Court. www.oyez.com A university in Illinois logs in all the cases of the
Supreme Court (very comprehensive in the past several years) and has gone back in history
and added some material on critical cases…not all by any means. A great source for some
of our discussions.
Use print, TV or virtual media sources that are credible, balanced and whose editorial
statements are verifiable--that is, not based primarily on conspiracy theories, political or
religious ideology. That means, The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal (news not
editorials) -- not Fox Cable News (it's all editorials, very little news). Reading news with a
particular slant is fine, but only after you have gotten the facts first and as unbiased an
interpretation of them as possible. In your online discussions, you will be expected to base your
statements on evidence-based facts and reasoned opinion. Beliefs are not sufficient, unless
accompanied by facts. Remember: No ranting allowed! No ‘dissing’ fellow classmates. Engage
in fact-based discussions.
IV. ORGANIZATION OF THE COURSE:
1. There are 14-15 weeks in this course (September 3-December 12). This course is entirely
online -- no on-campus meetings. There are 3 Units -- each one will run for 4+ weeks. At the
end of each Unit there will be an examination.
a) Exam format: 3 Multiple choice exams.
(A study guide will be provided ahead of each exam.) Each Unit will also have supplementary
lectures and outlines (based on the textbooks and Discussions) inside the course shell. Questions
will be drawn from the text books and the Online Discussions in which I will participate with
you, adding further information and analysis. You will be tested on ALL the information
assigned in the course readings, even if I have not referenced it. But the study guide will give
you the most important points to cover. Discussion Material and assignments will be available
for completion only during each 4+ week period, and will be closed thereafter.
b) Readings and Discussion postings occur AT THE SAME TIME. You should be reading and
posting in Discussions ever week throughout the Fall Term simultaneously. Your participation is
worth 50% of the course grade, and if you keep up, that is how you get full credit for each unit.
My objective is to have all students particpate and get maximum credit for that!!
Here are some important rules to remember:
WORDS TO THE WISE
a) ALL WORK MUST BE COMPLETED DURING THE 2 or 3 WEEK PERIOD--NO
EXCEPTIONS WILL BE GIVEN.
b) YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ASSIGNED READINGS.
7
c) THE UNIT EXAM IS AVAILABLE FOR ABOUT 24 HOURS AND YOU CAN
TAKE IT AT ANY TIME IN THAT PERIOD. BUT ONCE YOU DECIDE TO TAKE
THE EXAM, IT WILL BE OPEN FOR 1 HR. 15 MIN ONLY, AND THEN CLOSED.
d) OPPORTUNITY FOR POSTING TO THE DISCUSSION CLOSES ON THE LAST
DAY OF THE UNIT.
e) THE "FINAL" EXAM FOR EACH UNIT WILL BE ON THE LAST DAY OF THE
UNIT—AGAIN, YOU WILL HAVE 1 HR AND 15 MINUTES TO COMPLETE IT.
f) THE FINAL EXAM IS NOT "CUMULATIVE"--IT IS FOCUSED ON THE
CHAPTERS IN UNIT 3 OF THE COURSE.
g) A MISSED EXAM OR LATE DISCUSSION POSTINGS = 0
2. My grading Policy:
When you log into this course online, you will see that it is divided into three Units. Each unit =
1/3rd of your grade. Your overall course grade is calculated as follows -- Exams = 50%
(objective: multiple choice) + Online Discussions = 50%. No Extra Credit. You cannot
pass this course, if you do not participate in online discussions (you can see that from the ‘math’
above.) In other words, you completely control 50% of your grade just by actively participating
in the decisions. My objective would be to have all of you achieve that 50% because that
tells me you have ‘shown up for the discussions’ ...but unfortunately it never seems to
happen.
Compiling Your Total Course Grade. There are three course units so obviously each unit =
33.34 points (hence 3 x 33.34 = 100.2). That means that each unit Exam = 16.67 points and
similarly each Unit online Discussion also = 16.67 points. So there are six total scores which
would give you a possible 100.2 points. For example, this means that if you did not enter into
Discussions in any one unit, you would lose 16.67 points. So to sum up: half your grade (= 50
points) is completely in your hands through online discussion.
Exams will incorporate ALL assigned information including: my online notes for each Unit; the
assigned readings in the 2 textbooks, the Discussion topics for each Unit.
Online Discussion among students (and me) will be read and assessed by me on the basis of
1) number of postings, 2) the timeliness of postings, and 3) the quality of the content/your
analysis. The Discussion threads/Postings you make will respond to questions that I have set out
each week and are directed at the formal readings you are doing as well as some contemporary
political issues that are being/have been contested in the Court system such as The Affordable
Healthcare Act (= Obamacare), $$ in politics as free speech, same-sex marriage, etc. In
Discussions, when using text, or a paraphrase from an online or printed source in your
Discussion, you must provide a citation--the author/source (URL address and page if
online.) You don't need formal footnote conventions, just the information in parentheses after
the citation or paragraph will do.
3. PLAGIARISM IS FORBIDDEN: Copying or paraphrasing someone else's work from
any source, found online or in print, and presenting it as your own (without a citation) is a
violation of the university's code of ethics. It is called "plagiarism." This applies to all
assignments, including Online Discussion and Multiple Choice exams, or in any form
8
of communication with me. The punishment is severe: I will fail you for the assignment,
and for the course. No exceptions.
V: READINGS AND EXAM SCHEDULE:
Important: (Re) Read or Listen to the following, as background for the entire course.....
1) The Constitution of the United States, The Declaration of Independence, Federalist Paper
#51
2) Pres. Obama's Speech at the University of Michigan Commencement, April, 2010 --Theme:
The Importance of the Government --Federal, State and local--to the quality of life of individual
citizens and communities. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-presidentuniversity-michigan-spring-commencement
3) Listen to the NPR series on the Constitution: The Constitution Today, "The Diane Rehm
Show" at npr.org rebroadcast from 10.24.2010 (http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-1024/constitution-today-separation-powers-rebroadcast
Unit #1: September 3-October 12 -- The Founding of America: Was the Supreme Court a
truly co-equal Branch of Government at the outset of the Republic? How did it gain
legitimacy and become co-equal? The Constitution and the development of Federalism
Lucas Powe, The Supreme Court and the American Elite:
Chapter 1: Very Modest Beginnings
Chapter 2: The Court in a Two-Party Republic
Chapter 3: The States and the Republic
Chapter 4: The Sectional Crisis and the Jacksonian Court
C) Breyer: Part 1 – The People’s Trust
Chapter 1: Judicial Review, The Democratic Anomaly
Chapter 2: Establishing Judicial Review, Marbury v. Madison
Chapter 3: The Cherokees (1830’s)
Chapter 5: Little Rock (1957)
Unit 1 as an example of Online Discussion Themes and ‘due dates:’
9
Weeks 1+ (Sept. 3-14): The recently passed Affordable Healthcare Act (= Obamacare) has been
upheld (found to be Constitutional) by the US Supreme Court. Briefly research this on the Web
(for example www.oyez.com in the 2011 Term or www.scotusblog.com) and describe the issues
at stake for each side and why it was eventually upheld. Be succinct! Would you have voted with
the majority or the minority (it was a 5-4 Decision)??
Weeks 2-3 (Sept. 15-28): Read Breyer Chapters 3 and 5 for this … The Cherokee Nation
Decision and President Andrew Jackson: Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Discuss the interaction of
National and state politics on the Cherokee Nation.
Week 4 (Sept. 29-October 5): Pres. Jackson v. Pres. Eisenhower (Little Rock school integration
case, 1957) and enforcement of Supreme Court Decisions. Compare the approach of Jackson vs.
Eisenhower.
Week 5 (October 6-12): Engage at least two other students in a discussion of your views and
their views of the Healthcare decision and Cherokee/Little Rock issues. (Engaging other students
can be done in any week but must be accomplished by the close of Unit 1.)
Unit 1 Exam: Monday, October 13, 2013 – Multiple Choice Exam
Unit #2: Law and Politics – October 13-November 10
A) Discussion focus: Citizens United Supreme Court Case…$$ vs Free Speech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/citizens_united_v._federal_election_commission#opiniion_of_the_c
ourt
B) Bunsis, Howard: “Citizens United” Review Paper (emailed from Prof. Scott)
C) Breyer: Making Democracy Work, Part II Decisions that Work
Chapter 6: A Present Day Example
Chapter 7: Decisions that Work
Chapter 8: Congress, Statutes and Purposes
D) Lucas Powe: The Supreme Court…
Chapter V: The Civil War and Reconstruction
Chapter VI: Industrializing America
Chapter VII: Progressivism, Normalcy, and Depression
10
Online Discussion topic: Money in Politics (1860s to 2012) – Campaign Finance and the
Constitution – Democracy in Action: Free Speech and $$$ (see topics at end of syllabus)
Unit 2 Exam: Monday November 10 Multiple Choice
Unit 3: Civil Rights and Civil Liberties – November 10-December 12
A) Breyer: Part I
Chapter 4: Dred Scott
Chapter 5: Little Rock (re-read this chapter)
Chapter 6: A Present Day Example (re-read)
Also Breyer Part III:
Chapter 12: Past Court Decisions: Stability
Chapter 13: Individual Liberty, Permanent Values and Proportionality
Chapter 14: The President, National Security and Accountability
Chapter 15: Presidential Power: Guantanamo and Accountability
B) Lucas Powe
Chapter 8: After the New Deal Constitutional Revolution
Chapter 9: Reforming America
Chapter 10: An Uneasy Status Quo
Unit 3: Online Discussion Theme: Freedom v. Regulation (summary: see end of syllabus).
Final Exam: Unit 3 – Friday, December 12: Multiple Choice
11
VI: THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE ONLINE DISCUSSION TOPICS
AND QUESTIONS FOR THE ENTIRE COURSE
Unit 1: Online Discussion: September 3-October 13
Recent articles and summaries of the key points of the Affordable Healthcare Act legislation and
litigation: 2010-2012
The Cherokee Decision and President Jackson: Worcester v. Georgia (1832). (See Breyer’s
discussion; also in Lucas Powe).
Compare President Jackson vs. President Eisenhower (Little Rock Integration 1957) (see
Breyer’s discussion)
Post a response to the following questions:
1) September 3-September 14: Go out on the Web and find a summary of what the
legal challenges were to the Affordable Healthcare Act (= Obamacare) legislation. It had been
contested in Michigan and several other states as well as taken up by Attorneys General in 20+
states (at least 19 of those states were 'red' states from the last presidential election). 1) What are
the competing issues? 2) How did the Supreme Court uphold the Act? Where do you stand on
the core competing issues? Why the emphasis of Pres. Obama on Healthcare?
2) September 15-September 28: Using your Breyer reading, the Powe book Chapter, and
research online… what were the issues among the 'actors': The Cherokees, the State of Georgia,
the President (Andrew Jackson) and the Supreme Court?
3) September 29 - October 5: Is there a parallel between this case from the 1830's and the
1957-58 Little Rock cases? Discuss Breyer's point about "making the Constitution work" and
how it fits with the outcome of the Cherokee case and the Little Rock Case. What worked and
why? Use the Breyer book.
4) October 6-13: Engage at least 2 other students' points of views on the issues in the Cherokee
Nation, Little Rock or Healthcare litigation we researched in the prior weeks.
Unit 2: Online Discussion: October 13-November 10
Discussion Topic: Campaign Finance, money in politics, free speech and the Constitution
Post a response to the following…
1) October 13-19: Briefly describe the Key Issues in the Citizens United Case.
2) October 20-26: After the November, 2010 Elections, what was the impact of the Citizens
United Supreme Court Decision on the financing of Democrats, Republicans and new Political
movements like the Tea Party on House and Senate Elections? What happened in the 2012
12
Elections as a consequence of the Citizens United decision. That is amount of money spent on
the campaigns…?
3) October 27-November 2: Discuss the History of campaign financing in America. What is
different about the history of campaign financing in the 19th and 20th centuries?
4) November 3-10: Discuss the controversial issue of the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment,
and the ways in which corporations have been interpreted as "citizens" by Federal Courts +
engage at least 2 other students on whether you think this is 'fair' or will distort our elections in
the future.
Unit 3: Online Discussion: Civil Right/Civil Liberties -- November 10-December 12
Post 1) November 10-16: What were the issue(s) that caused significant civil unrest, protests and
some violence in Ferguson, Missouri in mid-August 2014? Why did this spin out of control?
How unique an event was/is this?
Post 2) November 17-23: Issues are 1) Gay marriage in California and 2) Federal Defense of
Marriage Act (DOMA, 1996). Go out to the Web and look up the legislation and litigation trial
on California's Prop. 8: Prohibiting Gay Marriage (from California to the Supreme Court). Trace
the history of the issue in California. What were/are the key arguments for or against 'gay
marriage' as framed in the litigation on California's Prop 8. Also summarize the 1996 Defense of
Marriage Act and what the Supreme Court ultimately ruled.
Post 2a) November 24-December 3: In the 'lame duck' session of Congress (November December 2010), legislation was passed that set out the direction for eliminating 'Don't
Ask/Don't Tell' as a policy dismissing openly gay service men and women. Just prior to that, a
California Federal Judge had "so ordered" that wherever US Armed Forces are stationed it will
be in violation of fundamental rights to deny Gay service men and women the opportunity to
identify themselves as such, and to penalize them for so doing. What does this mean in terms of
Constitutional law--what rights were Judge Philips insisting on, and what do you think of her
argument? Do you think this put pressure on the Congress to act as it did in the 'lame duck'
session?
Post 3) Also in November 24-December 3: The Breyer book lays out all the Constitutional
issues raised by the Supreme Court with respect to both the Korematsu (Japanese internment in
WWII) and the Guantanamo cases. Discuss the cases. In the Guantanamo cases how the Court
majority decided with respect to habeas corpus rights of prisoners. How does Breyer see these
cases? How does he explain the "pragmatic" reasoning of the Courts?
Post 4) December 4-12: Re-engage at least two students on any of the case/issues above in this
Unit: Civil rights and profiling; 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell', Gay Marriage, DOMA, incarceration of
the Japanese or the terrorists cases.
13