A. In his letter to James Madison on December 20, 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “Let me add that a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular.” Is that how the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution in the 19th Century (ie the 1800s)? Please discuss at least three readings/cases across at least three different weeks on the syllabus as evidence to support your answer. [No need to talk about the 20th century in this answer, since that will be covered by the other questions. However, you may refer to 20th century opinions if they bolster your argument about the 19th]. (700-800 words)
cases/pdf
– Miranda v AZ
– Mapp v Oh
– Texas v Johnson
– madison/Jefferson
– alien and sedition
– U.S constitution
– slaughterhouse cases (a good one)
or any other case i provided you think in the files you think good for this question
B. What do Constitutional law scholars mean when they refer to the “Lochner era” and how is it connected to the doctrine of substantive due process? Please discuss at least three cases across at least three different weeks on the syllabus as evidence to support your answer. (700-800 words)
Cases
– Locher v N.Y
– Allgeger v LA
– West Coast hotel vs Parish
-Buchanan v. Warley
– Adkins vs children’s hospital
C. In your opinion, which was the best of the various approaches that Supreme Court justices advocated for incorporating the Bill of Rights and applying it to the states, and why? In answering the question, please clearly explain the different approaches using at least three cases across at least three weeks on the syllabus. (700-800 words)
Cases
– Gitlow v N.Y
– Mcdonald v. Chicago
– Mapp v. Ohio
– Gideon v wainwright
– Powell v Alabama
A few tips:
1. Note: the word range is not a suggestion, it is a requirement. Essays that are shorter than 700 or longer than 800 words will have points deducted.
2. Make sure you answer the question directly and succinctly in the first few sentences, in something akin to a thesis statement. Then move on to presenting evidence to support your argument.
3. Don’t spend too many words explaining the background and facts of the cases. You don’t need to explain the case beyond what is necessary for your argument. You need to conserve your words to have enough to make a really strong argument.
4. It’s totally and completely fine to cite and/or quote dissents to support your argument. Just be clear that the argument you are talking about was not the one that carried the day in that case.
5. When you quote the readings or cite a specific idea from them, you must include the page number in parentheses at the end of the sentence.
6. These questions are designed so that you don’t need to do outside research and can focus on analyzing the readings that we have discussed together in class. If, for some reason you end up doing outside research, you must cite your source fully using a footnote.
7. Please proofread your responses carefully. We do take clarity and organization, as well as spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. into account.
Assessment:
Each question is worth 33 points (x 3 = 99 + one point for writing your name).
We will assign points based on the following rubric.
33: The response is well-written and has a creative and ambitious argument that is made clearly up front and carried through to the end. Makes good use of the course concepts and readings to back that argument up. Shows clear understanding of concepts and readings.
31: The response is well-written and has a solid (but not necessarily ambitious) argument which is sustained throughout the paper. Makes good use of the course concepts and readings to back that argument up, but may have some organizational problems.
29: The response is generally well-written, and has a clear argument by the end, but it not necessarily clear at the beginning. Shows a solid understanding of the majority of key concepts and readings, but does not always make good use of the cases and readings to support the argument.
27: The response demonstrates a pretty good understanding of the cases and concepts, but does not use course material to build a clear argument. It may have an argument at the beginning and/or the end, but not carry that argument through the analysis, OR the argument itself may reveal some confusion about a key concept.
25: Either states an argument but does not build support for the argument using cases and readings from the course, OR does not state a clear argument but seems to reach one by the end. In both cases, discussion may reveal some confusion about a key concept.
23: The response does not state a clear argument, and the analysis of the cases and readings either demonstrates confusion about some concepts, or has problems with presentation, organization, and writing.
21: The paper lacks a clear argument and has some problems with presentation, organization, and writing. It also suggests some misunderstandings of key concepts or readings.
19: The paper has major problems with presentation, organization, and writing, and demonstrates major misunderstandings of key concepts or readings.
