Northern
Department
of Political Science
REVISED SYLLABUS
POLS 411
Constitutional Law II
Civil Rights: Race, Sex, & Sexual
Orientation Discrimination
“I mean,
you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and
clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
—Senator
Joseph Biden (D-DE), January 31, 2007.
“Things will change most
hastily. Tell those niggers to go home. ME/OUT ... Die Sem Burr 10th … Hmz Sdn. Cr. What time? The VA Tech
shooters messed up w/having only one shooter…”
—Anonymous
message written in black ink on the wall of a women’s restroom in Grant Hall
Tower D,
Black students from
Civil rights and civil liberties are distinct concepts. Civil rights emanate from the concept of equality. Unlike civil liberties which are personal freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights (such as religious freedom, free speech, privacy, etc.), civil rights issues involve the status of persons with shared characteristics who have been historically disadvantaged in some way. Therefore, issues of race, sex, and sexual orientation will be the primary focus of our discussion, though we will touch on other issues such as economic status and genetics. We will read representative Supreme Court cases and other material in order to understand how civil rights have developed in American political history. In addition to our readings and in-class discussions, students will participate as justices in moot court decision-making exercises. In the end we will critically assess the role of the Supreme Court. Have the justices done too little or gone too far in the area of civil rights? Is discrimination a thing of the past?
Spring 2008
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 12:30-1:45pm; T 5:00-5:45 & by appointment
Learning Objectives:
1. To think critically
about the American form of government, particularly the 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
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 as well
as C-SPAN’s regular “America
& the Courts” coverage, which generally airs Saturday’s at 6pm CST. |
|
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% |
|
|
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
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
Race Discrimination
Week 1
Introduction & 19th Century Racial Discrimination
T Jan 15 Introduction, syllabus review, how to brief a case. Read optional background information: introductory
material in Epstein & Walker, the Constitution in the back of the book, and
Kerr’s “How to Read a Legal Opinion” in the course documents section of
Blackboard.
TH Jan 17 Dred
Scott v. Sandford (1857) (on-line only: abridged; full:
Taney only); Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).
Week 2 Early 20th
Century Racial Discrimination
T Jan 22 Missouri
ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938) (on-line only: abridged; full);
Shelley v. Kraemer
(1948); In-class film excerpt: New York: Episode Six (1929-1941)—section
on racial segregation in housing, “racial redlining” (10 minutes).
TH Jan 24 Sweatt v. Painter (1950); McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) (on-line
only: abridged; full).
Week 3 Racial Discrimination and
the Warren Court
T Jan 29 Brown v.
Board of Education (I) (1954), Brown v. Board of Education
(II) (1955), Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) (on-line only: abridged; full).
TH Jan 31 Burton
v. Wilmington Parking Authority (1961); Heart of Atlanta Motel v.
United States (1964) (on-line only: full).
Week 4 Racial
Discrimination from the
T Feb 5 Loving v.
Virginia (1967); Swann
v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg (1971).
TH Feb 7 Moose
Lodge #107 v. Irvis (1972); Board of Education
of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell (1991) (on-line only: abridged; full).
Week 5 Racial Discrimination in
Contemporary Public Schools & Affirmative Action
T Feb 12 United
States v. Fordice (1992) (on-line only: abridged; full);
Regents of the University
of California v. Bakke (1978).
TH Feb 14 Class Cancelled
Week 6 Classes
Cancelled
Week 7 Racial
Discrimination from the Rehnquist to the Roberts Court
T Feb 26 City of
Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989); Adarand
Constructors v. Pena (1995).
TH Feb 28 Grutter
v. Bollinger (2003), Parents Involved
in Community Schools v. Seattle School District (2007) read all opinions
(on-line only: abridged; full).
Week 8
Conference Day I
T Mar 4 No Class.
Benjamin Harrison Day.
TH Mar 6 Conference Day I -- Justices meet
to deliberate and vote on cases.
Week 9 Spring Break
Sex Discrimination
Week 10 Sex Discrimination:
Foundations
T Mar 18 Bradwell v. Illinois (1873) (on-line only: abridged; full);
Minor v. Happersett (1875) (on-line only: full).
TH Mar 20 Muller v.
Oregon (1908) (on-line only: full)
[Optional: Read some of the famous “Brandeis Brief”
from Muller]; Goesaert
v. Cleary (1948) (on-line only: full).
Week 11 Sex Discrimination from
the Warren to Burger Courts
T Mar 25 Hoyt v.
Florida (1961) (on-line only: full);
Reed v. Reed (1971).
TH Mar 27 Frontiero v. Richardson (1973); Craig v. Boren (1976).
Week 12 Sex Discrimination &
the Burger Court
T Apr 1 Orr
v. Orr (1979) (on-line only: full);
Michael M. v. Superior
Court of Sonoma County (1981) (on-line only: abridged; full,
Rehnquist & Brennan only). Final
opinions from Conference I due.
TH Apr 3 No Class. Jane Goodall’s Birthday.
Week 13 Sex Discrimination &
the Rehnquist Court
T Apr 8 Rostker v. Goldberg (1981); Mississippi University for
Women v. Hogan (1982) (on-line only: abridged;
full,
O’Connor & Powell only).
TH Apr 10 J.E.B.
v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994) (on-line only: abridged; full,
all but Rehnquist); United
States v. Virginia (1996).
Other Forms of Discrimination
Week 14
Conference Day II & Other Forms of Discrimination
T Apr 15 Conference Day II - Justices meet to deliberate and vote on cases.
TH Apr 17 Genetics: Buck
v. Bell (1927) (on-line only: full);
Economics: San Antonio
Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973).
Week 15 Discrimination Based on
National Origin, Residency, and Sexual Orientation
T Apr 22 National Origin: Plyler
v. Doe (1982) (on-line only: abridged;
full,
Brennan, Marshall, & Burger only); Residency: Seanez
v. Roe (1999).
TH Apr 24 Gay
Rights? Bowers v.
Hardwick (1986).
Week 16 Gay Rights and the
T Apr 29 Hurley v.
Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston (1995) (on-line only: abridged;
full).
TH May 1 Romer v. Evans (1996).
Week 17 Gay Rights
and the
T May 6 Boy
Scouts of America v. Dale (2000).
TH May 8 Lawrence
v. Texas (2003). Final
opinions due from Conference II.