Northern Illinois University

Spring 2007  

POLS 412
Constitutional Law III

Civil Liberties:

The First Amendment and the Right to Privacy

            This course focuses on three areas of constitutional interpretation. Through a review of various U.S. Supreme Court cases and related material, we will examine the concepts of religious liberty, freedom of speech, and privacy. In each area, we will also study the Court as a political institution, paying particular attention to the larger political contexts in which decisions are made as well as voting behavior of the justices. Can Supreme Court justices be classified as “liberal” or “conservative?”  If so, how does this affect their interpretation of the constitution?

T TH 3:30 - 4:45  DU 461

Instructor: Artemus Ward
Office: 410 Zulauf Hall
Office Phone: 815-753-7041
E-mail: aeward@niu.edu
Office Hours: T TH 2:00pm-3:15pm & by appointment


 

Learning Objectives

1. To think critically about the American form of government, the role of the constitution, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
2. To gain experience and knowledge by thinking critically about and participating in supreme court decision-making exercises.
3. To gain knowledge of the process and politics of constitutional decision-making.


 

Required Text

Lee Epstein and Thomas Walker. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights, Liberties & Justice, 5th ed. (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 2004). THE RED BOOK.


Course Requirements

Attendance

All students are required to attend each class. A sign-in sheet will passed around at the start of each class. It is your responsibility to LEGIBLY sign the attendance sheet each day. If I can’t read it, you weren’t there.

In-Class Participation

All students are required to participate when called on in class. Therefore, you must come to each class and be prepared to discuss that day's assigned cases. I will randomly call on students so that everyone has an equal chance to participate. Your participation grade is primarily based on those instances in which you are called on. Being unprepared or absent on those days will severely hurt this part of your grade. Though it is no substitute for being absent or unprepared on the days you are called on, you can help your participation grade by volunteering as often as you wish.

On-Line Participation

All students are required to go on-line each week through Blackboard. You are required to read each message posted to the discussion board, and by Friday post at least one (and not more than two) quality messages of your own about that week’s course material and/or current events that relate to the course such as developments in the U.S. Supreme Court. Toward that end, you may want to regularly consult the leading Supreme Court blog at http://www.scotusblog.com

Moot Court and Paper

Participation in the Supreme Court decision-making exercise and paper - all students are required to participate in the exercise acting as a Supreme Court Justice. Failure to attend a conference day will result in a reduction of one full grade on your overall course participation grade. No exceptions. Each student is required to write one 5-6 pp. paper written in the form of an opinion (either majority, concurring, or dissenting) on one moot court case. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU FOLLOW THE SUGGESTIONS ON THE “PAPER TIPS” DOCUMENT located in the “course documents” section of Blackboard.

Extra Credit

You may write additional opinions for extra credit. One quality 2-3-page paper that covers 1/3 of the required opinions is worth 1/3 a grade boost on your main paper grade. A quality 4-page paper that covers 2/3 of the required opinions is worth 2/3 a grade boost on your main paper grade. A quality 5-6-page paper that covers all of the required opinions is worth 1 full grade boost on your main paper grade. The maximum amount of extra credit you can gain is one full grade boost—that means one 5-6 page paper, or one 2-3 page paper and one 4 page paper, or three 2-3 page papers. See the course documents section for further details.

Final Exam

The final exam is a comprehensive essay covering the entire course. You will be asked to answer an overall question based on specific opinions in the cases we have read. You may use your notes, briefs, or anything that is your own work. You may not use the book or any other material that is not your own work with the exception of a copy of the syllabus and the U.S. Constitution. Can your notes/briefs be typed? Of course they can. The final will take the entire exam period so managing your allotted time well is essential. Bring a blue book or two and something to write with. Write legibly. If I can’t read it, I can’t grade it.

Graduate Students

Students taking the course for graduate credit ONLY have to complete a 15-20pp. research paper. Graduate students have no other course requirements. Of course it is understood that at the graduate level you will do all of the assigned readings, attend every class, and consistently participate in class discussions and the moot courts. There are several options for the required paper. You may expand the required undergraduate paper using additional cases, law review and other journal articles, and books. You may also do another type of research paper that is related to the course material such as an annotated bibliography, research proposal for a Master’s Thesis or Doctoral Dissertation, or other type of original research. See me as early in the semester as possible to discuss your choice. Graduate students do not need to write the 5-6 pp. paper required of all undergraduates nor take the final exam, unless of course you want to for fun! Your grade will be based 70% on your paper and 30% on participation.


Grading System

Final grades will be determined by the following scale:

Grade

Percent

General Grading Definition

A

90-100

High participation, submits high quality work, shows interest in the course

B

80-89

Participates actively, submits good quality work consistently

C

70-79

Some participation, submits average quality work

D

60-69

Lack of participation, below average quality work

F

0-59

Little or no participation, submits unacceptable quality of work

Grade Breakdown:

Requirement

% of Total Grade

Attendance

20%

In-Class Participation

10%

On-Line Participation

10%

5-6 Page Moot Court Paper

30%

Final Exam

30%

Total=

100%


Course Policies

1. Extracurricular Activities - It is your responsibility to notify me in advance of any activities that will disrupt your attendance. If your activities make it impossible for you to attend classes each week, you should consider withdrawing from the course. Material is covered in class that cannot be found in the course readings.

2. Late Work - Anything turned in late will be marked down one-third grade for every day it is overdue. Exceptions are made only in the most extraordinary circumstances and I will require some sort of documentation to make any accommodation.

3. Cheating and Plagiarism - PLAGIARISM, SIMPLY DEFINED, IS TAKING SOMEONE ELSE'S WORDS OR IDEAS AND REPRESENTING THEM AS BEING YOUR OWN. It is specifically prohibited by University regulations, which state:

Good academic work must be based on honesty. The attempt of any student to present as his or her own work that which he or she has not produced is regarded by the faculty and administration as a serious offense. Students are considered to have cheated if they copy the work of another during an examination or turn in a paper or an assignment written, in whole or in part, by someone else. Students are guilty of plagiarism, intentional or not, if they copy material from books, magazines, or other sources without identifying and acknowledging those sources or if they paraphrase ideas from such sources without acknowledging them. Students guilty of, or assisting others in, either cheating or plagiarism on an assignment, quiz, or examination may receive a grade of F for the course involved and may be suspended or dismissed from the university. (Undergraduate Catalog)

4. Statement Concerning Students with Disabilities - Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, NIU is committed to making reasonable accommodations for persons with documented disabilities. Those students with disabilities that may have some impact on their coursework and for which they may require accommodations should notify the Center for Access-Ability Resources (CAAR) on the fourth floor of the Health Services Building (753-1303). CAAR will assist students in making appropriate accommodations with course instructors. It is important that CAAR and instructors be informed of any disability-related needs during the first two weeks of the semester.

5. Undergraduate Writing Awards - The Department of Political Science will recognize, on an annual basis, outstanding undergraduate papers written in conjunction with 300-400 level political science courses or directed studies. Authors do not have to be political science majors or have a particular class standing. Winners are expected to attend the Department's spring graduation ceremony where they will receive a certificate and $50.00. Papers, which can be submitted by students or faculty, must be supplied in triplicate to a department secretary by the end of February. All copies should have two cover pages - one with the student's name and one without the student's name. Only papers written in the previous calendar can be considered for the award. However, papers completed in the current spring semester are eligible for the following year's competition even if the student has graduated.

6. Department of Political Science Web Site - Undergraduates are strongly encouraged to consult the Department of Political Science web site on a regular basis. This up-to-date, central source of information will assist students in contacting faculty and staff, reviewing course requirements and syllabi, exploring graduate study, researching career options, tracking department events, and accessing important details related to undergraduate programs and activities. To reach the site, go to http://polisci.niu.edu


Course Calendar

INCORPORATION

Week 1 Course Introduction & Incorporation
T Jan 16 Introduction, syllabus review, how to brief a case, using Blackboard: see http://www.helpdesk.niu.edu/its/helpdesk/blackboard_support.shtml
TH Jan 18 Barron v. Baltimore (1833) and Hurtado v. California (1884) (Optional Background Information – Epstein & Walker introductory material; The U.S. Constitution located in the back of the book).


RELIGION

Week 2 Incorporation & Free Exercise I
T Jan 23 Palko v. Connecticut (1937) and Duncan v. Louisiana (1968).

TH Jan 25 Free Exercise Foundations: Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940) and Sherbert v. Verner (1963).


Week 3 Free Exercise II
T Jan 30 Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) and Employment Division v. Smith “The Peyote Case” (1990).

TH Feb 1 City of Boerne v. Flores (1997) and Gonzales v. O Centro Espitita Beneficente Uniao Do Vegital (2006) (on-line only: abridged, full).


Week 4 Establishment: Foundations & Aid to Religious Schools
T Feb 6 Foundations: Everson v. Board of Education (1947) and Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971).
TH Feb 8 Aid to Religious Schools: Agostini v. Felton (1997) and Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)


Week 5 Establishment: School Prayer I
T Feb 13 The Warren Court: Engel v. Vitale (1962) (on-line only: abridged, full) and School District of Abington Township v. Schempp (1963).
TH Feb 15
The Burger Court: Marsh v. Chambers (1983) (on-line only: full) and Wallace v. Jaffree (1985) (on-line only: abridged; full).


Week 6 Establishment: School Prayer II
T Feb 20  The
Rehnquist Court I: Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) and Lee v. Weisman (1992).
TH Feb 22 The Rehnquist Court II:
Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000) (on-line only: abridged; full) and Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2004) (on-line only: full).


Week 7 Establishment: Government Endorsement of Religion I
T Feb 27 Lynch v. Donnelly (1984) (on-line only: abridged, full) and County of Allegheny v. ACLU (1989) (on-line only: abridged, full—Blackmun & Kennedy only).
TH Mar 1 Capitol Square Review Board v. Pinette (1995) (on-line only: full—Scalia & Stevens only) and
Locke v. Davey (2004) (on-line only: abridged; full—Rehnquist & Scalia only)


Week 8 Establishment: Government Endorsement of Religion II
T Mar 6 The Ten Commandments Cases: McCreary County v. ACLU
(2005) (on-line only; abridged, full) and Van Orden v. Perry (2005) (on-line only; abridged, full).
TH Mar 8
CONFERENCE DAY I - Justices meet to deliberate and vote on cases.


 

Week 9 Spring Break

 


 

PRIVACY

 

Week 10 Privacy: Foundations
T Mar 20 Foundations: Olmstead v. United States (1928) (Brandeis only -- on-line only: abridged, full) and Poe v. Ullman (1961) (Harlan only – on-line only: abridged, full).
TH Mar 22 Reproductive Freedom:
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) and Roe v. Wade (1973).


 

Week 11 Privacy: Abortion & Intimacy
T Mar 27 Abortion:
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) (on-line only: abridged, fullBreyer,
Scalia, & O’Connor only) everyone must read O’Connor’s concurrence (on-line only).

TH Mar 29 Intimacy: Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) and Lawrence v. Texas (2003).


Week 12 Conference II & Speech in Times of Crisis
T Apr 3
CONFERENCE DAY II - Justices meet to deliberate and vote on cases. Final opinions from Conference I due today.  

SPEECH

TH Apr 5 Speech in Times of Crisis: Schenck v. United States (1919), Abrams v. United States (1919), and Gitlow v. New York (1925).

 


Week 13 Speech in Times of Crisis
T Apr 10
Dennis v. United States (1951), Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969).
Symbolic Speech: United States v. O'Brien (1968). 
TH Apr 12
NO CLASS: Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago.


Week 14 Regulating Expression I
T Apr 17
Symbolic Speech: Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Texas v. Johnson (1989).
TH Apr 19 Fighting Words: Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) and Cohen v. California (1971).


Week 15 Expression II
T Apr 24 Hill v. Colorado (2000) and R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992).

TH Apr 26 Money as Political Speech: Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and McConnell v. FEC (2003) (on-line only: abridged, full—Stevens/O’Connor opinion, Rehnquist dissent and the separate opinions of Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy only). Go to http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.asp to find out who gives what to whom. Final opinions due from Conference II


Week 16 Obscenity
T May 1 Roth v. United States (1957) and Miller v. California (1973).
TH May 3 New York v. Ferber (1982) and Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002).


Week 17 Final Exam TH May 10, 4-5:50pm.