Prerequisite: Sophomore standing or permission of instructor.

Course Content and Objectives

In an effort to promote self-government and prevent abuses of power, the framers of the U.S. Constitution created a complex system of representative elections and fragmented authority. They hoped that their design would generally allow the people themselves to direct the nation's affairs, but would also prevent either the people or their elected representatives from violating certain fundamental principles of limited government.

In this course and its sequel, Constitutional Law II (PSC 325), we will examine the evolution of this design over time. In doing so, we will assess three related strategies adopted by the framers to empower democratic government while also limiting it. The framers sought to limit governmental power by dividing it among many hands, subjecting it to the regular check of democratic elections, and authorizing the judicial protection of certain fundamental rights.

Moving chronologically from the founding to the present, we will examine the operation of these strategies in the context of a wide range of legal and political conflicts--involving the legitimate scope of presidential authority during wartime, the right to bear arms, the resolution of disputed vote counts in a presidential election, race-conscious affirmative action policies, marriage equality for same-sex couples, and much more.

The most important goals of the course are to help you develop an enriched understanding of the principles embedded in this country's fundamental law and a refined ability to determine on your own whether the practice of American politics is faithful to these principles. As such, the course addresses controversial topics that raise difficult questions about our personal and political beliefs, and it is therefore essential that students make every effort to tolerate competing views and to treat each other with concern and respect.

Course Readings

Most of the readings for the course are from two constitutional law casebooks, one published and one unpublished. These are the same two books that will be used for Con Law II next semester.

The published book is David M. O’Brien's Constitutional Law and Politics, volume 2 (7th edition, 2008), available at the SU Bookstore. If you purchase it elsewhere, be sure to get the 7th edition, volume 2. (The ISBN# is 978-0-393-93039-9.) This is the only book you are required to purchase, but it is quite expensive (approximately $70.00). If this poses a hardship for anyone, please discuss this with me as soon as possible.

The unpublished book is Howard Gillman, Mark Graber, and Keith Whittington's American Constitutionalism, Volume 1: Structures of Government (designated "GGW" in the schedule below). The editors have made an electronic version of this casebook available for our use, free of charge. In the course schedule below, I have provided links to pdf files for each chapter of the casebook. Some of these files are quite long. You are responsible for printing them yourself (or for reading them on screen), so be sure to plan accordingly.

In addition to the GGW chapters, some additional required readings are also available on-line. As with the GGW chapters, they are underlined in the course schedule below and are linked from this syllabus. The following on-line resources may be useful as well:

• U.S. Supreme Court (official website)

• SCOTUSBlog (the favorite blog of Supreme Court junkies everywhere)

• SCOTUSWiki (a companion to SCOTUSBlog, this site has great info on all upcoming cases at the Court)

• Lexis Nexis (the best source for decisions from all levels of the state and federal judiciary)

• Oyez (audio files of hundreds of Supreme Court oral arguments)

Course Expectations

Grades will be based on three papers, two exams, and class participation.

The papers (20% of your final grade each; 60% total)

A substantial portion of your final grade will be determined by your completion of three out-of-class writing assignments. In completing these three assignments, you have ten topics from which to choose. Each topic has a different due date, as indicated in the course schedule below. All papers are due in sections on the week for which they are assigned. That is, if your discussion section meets on Friday at 9:30 am, the papers are due on Friday at 9:30 am. Late papers will be accepted only under unusual circumstances, and only with Professor Keck's explicit approval.

Each paper should be approximately four pages, typed and double-spaced. Even more importantly, each paper should demonstrate your close reading of, and active engagement with, the texts that are assigned in the course schedule below. None of these papers requires any additional or outside reading, and I discourage you from doing any. What I am looking for is a clear argument of your own that responds to the assigned question and that is supported by a careful, detailed, and thoughtful discussion of the materials we have read. This support should include specific references and quotations to the readings, and you should be sure to provide page citations for each one.

Since good writing comes from careful revision, I encourage you to discuss your papers with me and/or your TA before they are due. And lastly, please consult my paper expectations guide before completing each assignment.

All students must turn in at least one paper by October 1, at least two by November 1, and at least three by December 3. If you wish, you may turn in a fourth paper (also by December 3), and we will drop your lowest grade. With those provisos, you may choose from among the following options.

Paper option #1: Read James Madison's 1789 speech proposing the Bill of Rights. Why did he propose such substantial changes so soon after the Constitution had been adopted? Put another way, what was wrong with the original Constitution, and how did Madison propose to fix it?

Paper option #2: Read Chief Justice Marshall's opinion in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). On what basis did he conclude that the federal statute authorizing the creation of a national bank was constitutional? Put another way, where did he find the congressional authority to enact this law? What implications, if any, do Marshall's arguments have for congressional authority to regulate the health insurance industry in the 21st century?

Paper option #3: Briefly summarize, in your own words, Chief Justice Marshall's argument for the Supreme Court's power of judicial review. On what basis did Marshall conclude that the Court has the authority to strike down a law that has been enacted by Congress or a state legislature? How persuasive was his argument? Did the Marshall Court's use of this power give us any reason to be concerned about its scope?

Paper option #4: Read Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) and Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). Did the increasingly bitter political and legal conflicts over slavery in the 1840s and 50s warp what was otherwise a fair and just Constitution? Or did they reveal fundamental defects in a Constitution that was pro-slavery from the start?

Paper option #5: Did President Lincoln act constitutionally when he suspended the writ of habeas corpus in 1861? If not, why did he do it? If so, why did the Chief Justice of the United States object so strongly to the president's actions? Do these questions have any implications for twenty-first century constitutional conflicts regarding the limits of presidential power? How so?

Paper option #6: Read the 1873 Slaughterhouse Cases and the 1883 Civil Rights Cases. What was the central purpose of the Reconstruction Amendments? Did the Supreme Court live up to that purpose in its early interpretations of those amendments? Do these questions have any implications for twenty-first century constitutional conflicts? How so?

Paper option #7: Read Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918). What kind of Constitution is it that would prevent the people's elected representatives from outlawing child labor? Does this decision indicate some fundamental defect in our Constitution, at least in the Constitution of 1918? What was that defect? What implications, if any, do these arguments have for congressional authority to regulate the health insurance industry in the 21st century?

Paper option #8: Read Lochner v. New York (1905). In Justice Holmes's view, what role should the Court play in our constitutional system? Would we be better off if the Court adhered to Holmes's view today? Why or why not?

Paper option #9: Read FDR's undelivered speech on the Gold-Clause Cases and his fireside chat on the Court-packing plan. Was the president's criticism of the Supreme Court justified? Why or why not? What would the Roberts Court have to do to justify similar criticism from President Obama?

Paper option #10: Read Justice Stone's footnote number four in U.S. v. Carolene Products (1938). What sort of role did Stone have in mind for the Court? Was there any reason to think, as of 1938, that the Court was fit to play this role?

Each of the above questions is large and challenging, and could well occupy more than four pages. We won't punish you if you veer onto a fifth page, but do your best to boil the question down to its essence, to focus in on a central theme, and to support your argument with carefully selected references (including quotations) to the primary sources that appear in our two books. To reiterate a couple points, your goal for this paper should be to develop and advance a clear argument of your own, supported by a careful, detailed, and thoughtful discussion of the required readings from the syllabus. And remember to consult my paper expectations guide.

I plan to nominate the best paper I receive this semester for a department-wide award.

Exams (15% each; 30% total)

We will have a midterm exam in early October and a final exam in December. Both will be in-class, closed-book exams. I will provide more details as the semester proceeds. 

Attendance and participation (10% of your grade)

This portion of your grade will be based on your in-class contribution to your own learning and that of your classmates. This contribution will require your physical presence in class, diligent preparation beforehand, and active engagement while you are there.

Physical presence is clear enough. We all have legitimate reasons for missing class on occasion, but I expect everyone to attend at least 85% of our class sessions, both lecture and discussion. Diligent preparation requires that you read the assigned pages prior to class and, whenever possible, spend some time thinking or (even better) talking about the material before class as well. The closer you can come to eating, sleeping, and breathing Con Law for the next four months, the better you will do. Active engagement involves attentive listening, careful note-taking, and raising a question whenever there's something you don't understand. In your Friday sections, it also involves regularly participating in the classroom discussions with your teaching assistant and fellow students. I recognize that such participation comes with some risks. After all, you might say something that reveals your own lack of knowledge. Rest assured that no one will be penalized for being wrong or imprecise, for expressing uncertainty or frustration, or for changing their minds. But it should be clear that you are trying, that you have done the readings, and that you are working toward a mastery of the material.

Your participation grade will be assigned as follows: In the final discussion section of the semester, you should submit a one-page self-assessment in which you assign yourself a letter grade (A, B+, etc.) for participation and then write a paragraph or two explaining and justifying that grade. For example, you might address the following questions: How many times were you absent from class? How often did you participate in class discussions? When you didn't participate, were you nonetheless alert and prepared for class? If so, then why didn't you speak up on those occasions? How often did you do anything that disrupted class discussions or distracted your fellow students (e.g., chatting, sleeping, cell phone ringing, leaving the room during class, etc.)? Your TA will read your self-assessment, compare it with his/her own perceptions, and then assign you a participation grade. If necessary, I will adjust this grade up or down for any students who made particularly notable contributions, for good or for ill, during our lecture sessions.  

Course Policies

Attendance and course readings: As noted above, successful performance in this course will require eating, sleeping, and breathing Con Law. More literally, it will require regularly reading, writing, thinking, and talking about the course material. I've been teaching constitutional law for more than ten years, and I've yet to have a student find a shortcut around this fact. Reading, writing, thinking, and talking about the course material. Every day. Or as close to that as you can manage.

Among other things, this task will require regular attendance in class. We will take attendance regularly in the Friday discussion sections, and we will do so occasionally in the twice-weekly lecture sessions as well. Everyone misses class sometimes for legitimate reasons, but you should do your best to keep such absences to a minimum. When you miss a lecture session, you will usually be able to listen to an audio recording of that lecture on-line. When you miss a discussion section, it will be more difficult to make up the work, but if the absence was due to illness or some other documented and legitimate reason, we will help you do so to the extent possible. Irregular attendance will negatively affect your grade both directly (in the participation portion) and indirectly (by hindering your performance on exams and papers).

Discussion sections: As noted above, all students in attendance will be expected to participate in class discussion. In preparing for your discussion sections, you are responsible for all assigned pages, but you should pay particular attention to the pages and questions that are identified as a discussion focus for each week in the schedule below.

Grading policy: Most of the written assignments for this course will be graded by your teaching assistant. If you have any questions about these written assignments, either before or after they are due, you are welcome to speak with either me or the TA. If you are dissatisfied with your grade on any assignment graded by the TA, you may appeal that grade to me. To do so, you should submit a clean copy of the paper to me, which I will re-grade from scratch. This means that you could receive a grade that is lower, higher, or the same as the grade originally assigned.

Late paper policy: Late papers will be accepted only under unusual circumstances, and only with my explicit permission (so don't bother pleading with your TA). If and when I agree to offer an extension, I will grade the late-arriving paper myself.

Academic support services: SU provides a variety of tutoring and academic support services, and I encourage you to avail yourself of these resources. Doing so may help you learn the course material better, determine the best strategies for studying that material, improve your writing skills, and have less stress about your success in the course. Tutoring centers include the Tutoring & Study Center (TSC), the Writing Center, the Math and Calculus Clinics, the Physics Clinic, the Chemistry Clinic, and the Athletics Academic Services Center. All schedules and locations are posted on the TSC website.

Academic integrity: The Syracuse University Academic Integrity Policy holds students accountable for the integrity of the work they submit. This means that it is your responsibility to be familiar with the Policy in general and to learn about the specific expectations of each of your instructors regarding proper citation of sources in written work. The policy also governs the integrity of work submitted in exams and assignments as well as the veracity of signatures on attendance sheets and other verifications of participation in class activities. Serious sanctions can result from academic dishonesty of any sort, but in my experience, the most common form of such dishonesty is plagiarism, which SU policy defines as "the use of someone else's language, ideas, information, or original material without acknowledging the source." If you are caught violating any of these rules, I will assign an F for the course and then refer the matter to the CAS academic integrity coordinator for additional action. For more information and the complete policy, see the Academic Integrity Policy and Procedures. 

Student academic work: Any work that you produce as part of your participation in this course may be used for educational purposes in future courses. For example, if you write a very good paper, I may distribute it in future classes as a model. If and when I do so, I will always remove your name so that the work is rendered anonymous. 

Reasonable accommodation: If you believe that you need accommodations for a disability, please contact the Office of Disability Services (ODS), located in Room 309 of 804 University Avenue (443-4498). ODS is responsible for coordinating disability-related accommodations and will issue students with documented disabilities Accommodation Authorization Letters, as appropriate. Since accommodations may require early planning and generally are not provided retroactively, please contact ODS as soon as possible. 

Religious holidays: In accordance with SU policy, I will excuse any absences that result from religious observances, provided that you notify me in advance of the planned absence.

Office hours and email communication: My regular office hours are listed above, but you are welcome to make an appointment for some other time, or simply to drop by. If you just have a quick question, I encourage you to reach me by email. In addition, I will regularly use Blackboard's "Send email" feature to contact all members of the class. This means that you are responsible for regularly checking your SU email account.

Course Schedule

All required readings for the course are bulleted below. The page numbers for the O'Brien text refer to the 7th edition, volume 2. The pages numbers for the GGW chapters refer to the numbers that appear at the bottom of each page in the pdf documents. Along with these chapters, several additional readings--those that are underlined--are also available on-line, linked from this syllabus. 

I. An Introduction to American Constitutionalism

We'll be getting started somewhat slowly here, but you should use this first week to begin thinking about the fundamental purposes of the U.S. Constitution. Why do we have a constitution? What is it supposed to do for us?

Tues., Aug. 31: An Introduction to American Constitutionalism. No reading beforehand.

Thurs., Sept. 2: I'll be in Washington, DC, attending the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, but class will still meet. You'll be watching a film entitled The Supreme Court: One Nation Under Law. No reading beforehand.

Fri., Sept. 3: Focus for discussion: the film from yesterday and Justice Souter's recent commencement address at Harvard. Be sure to read the latter before your section. If you read the speech and have time to spare, I recommend skimming the introduction and chapter one of GGW, which introduce a number of the key concepts and questions that we'll be discussing this year.

• Justice David Souter, Harvard Commencement Remarks (May 27, 2010)

II. The Origins of American Constitutionalism

Our pace will now begin to pick up, as we turn our attention to the drafting, adoption, and immediate amendment of the U.S. Constitution. We'll be referring with some regularity to the constitutional text, so make sure you're familiar with it. (It's also available here, or in the O'Brien book, at pp. 1-21.)

Tues., Sept 7: A Democratic Revolution; and a Retreat

The materials in GGW chapter 2 focus on constitutional development before the Constitution was written. Does that make any sense? Be sure to read the Declaration of Independence, which comes toward the end of the chapter.

• GGW Chapter 2, pp. 52-55, 57-69, 72-74 

Thurs., Sept 9: Drafting and Ratifying a Constitution

• GGW Chapter 3, pp. 77-110

Fri., Sept 10: No sections this week.

Tues., Sept. 14: Reading the Constitutional Text

• GGW Chapter 3, pp. 111-130

Thurs., Sept. 16: The Bill of Rights

• GGW Chapter 3, pp. 132-135

• James Madison, Speech Proposing the Bill of Rights to the House of Representatives (June 8, 1789)

• O'Brien, pp. 324-328, 408-417, 709-717, 870-2, 1028-1035, 1157-8

Fri., Sept. 17: Focus for discussion: The Bill of Rights. Be sure to read James Madison's 1789 speech proposing the Bill of Rights before your section. Go ahead and re-read Amendments 1-10 and 27 of the Constitution as well. Why did Congress and the states alter the new Constitution so dramatically so soon? What was the purpose of these amendments, taken together? What changes were made between Madison's original proposal and the amendments that were ultimately adopted? Why? Paper option #1 is due in class today.

Recommended reading: Akhil Reed Amar, The Bill of Rights, Creation and Reconstruction.

III. The Federalist and Jeffersonian Eras

Note that the volume of reading continues to increase, as we turn our attention now to the Constitution's actual operation, once its governmental structures were up and running. As you read the assigned pages, note the frequency of conflict over the Constitution's meaning, even in its first years of existence.  

Tues., Sept. 21: One United Nation or 13 Independent States?

• GGW Chapter 4, pp. 143-150, 169-172, 191-202, 247-249

Thurs., Sept. 23: Congressional Power in the Early Republic

• GGW Chapter 4, pp. 151-169, 172-190

Fri., Sept. 24: Focus for discussion: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). Be sure to read pp. 155-169 of GGW chapter four before your section. Paper option #2 is due in class today.  

Tues., Sept. 28: Presidential Power in the Early Republic

• GGW Chapter 4, pp. 203-218

Thurs., Sept. 30: Judicial Power in the Early Republic

• GGW Chapter 4, pp. 219-237

Fri., Oct. 1: Focus for discussion: Marbury v. Madison (1803). Be sure to read pp. 225-233 of GGW chapter four before your section. Paper option #3 is due in class today. All students must turn in at least one paper by today. 

Tues., Oct. 5: Property Rights and Civil Liberties in the Early Republic

• GGW Chapter 4, pp. 237-246

• O'Brien, pp. 231-236, 240-244

Thurs., Oct. 7: Midterm Exam. No reading.

Fri., Oct. 8:  Focus for discussion: The Sedition Act and the Cherokee removal cases. Be sure to read pp. 170-172 of GGW chapter four and, looking ahead, pp. 329-333 of GGW chapter five before your section. Was the 1798 Sedition Act unconstitutional? If so, why was it enacted by Congress, signed by President Adams, and enforced by the federal courts? As for the Cherokees, the Supreme Court ruled in their favor, but that didn't much help them. Why not? And thinking about both conflicts together, what role should state governments play in determining the meaning of the Constitution?

IV. The Jacksonian Era

We turn now to the Jacksonian era--named for President Andrew Jackson--a period during which many of our governmental institutions became significantly more democratic, but the institution of Southern slavery became ever more entrenched. We'll focus on the shifting power and authority of state and federal legislative institutions and the sharpening of the longstanding constitutional conflict over slavery. Note that the Supreme Court's infamous Dred Scott decision appears in both GGW and O'Brien. The justices' opinions in this case were famously long, and the edited versions in the two volumes differ significantly. I've asked you to read the version in O'Brien, but if you have time, skim the relevant pages in GGW chapter five as well (pp. 306-312).

Tues., Oct. 12: The Age of the Common Man?

• GGW Chapter 5, pp. 283-297

• O'Brien, pp. 244-251

Thurs., Oct. 14: State and Nation, Liberty and Union

• GGW Chapter 5, pp. 297-305

• O'Brien, pp. 1360-1371

• GGW Chapter 5, pp. 312-329

Fri., Oct. 15: Focus for discussion: Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) and Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). Be sure to read pp. 297-305 of GGW chapter five and pp. 1360-1371 of O'Brien before your section. Was the original Constitution "a Covenant with Death, an Agreement with Hell," as abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison described it in 1844? Paper option #4 is due in class today.  

Tues., Oct. 19: Presidential and Judicial Power Before the Civil War

• GGW Chapter 5, pp. 329-351, 356-368, 371-378

V. Civil War and Reconstruction

The U.S. Constitution has faced many crises--many historical moments at which it might have fallen apart--but the Civil War of 1860-65 was by far the greatest. In what ways did the Constitution change as a result of this crisis? Who should we credit as the "framers" of these changes?

Thurs., Oct. 21: The Constitution at War

• GGW Chapter 6, pp. 391-394, 418-433, 449-470, 473-478

Fri., Oct. 22: Focus for discussion: President Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Be sure to read pp. 427-429, 449-456 of GGW chapter six before your section. Paper option #5 is due in class today.  

Tues., Oct. 26: Reconstructing the Constitution

• GGW Chapter 6, pp. 395-417, 433-440, 470-472, 478-485, 489-490

Thurs., Oct. 28: A New Birth of Freedom?

• O'Brien, pp. 277-281, 1371-1378, 341-345

  • Or

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 506-512, 607-621

Fri., Oct. 29: Focus for discussion: the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), the Civil Rights Cases (1883), and Hurtado v. California (1884). Be sure to read pp. 277-281, 1371-1378, and 341-345 of O'Brien before your section. Alternatively, you can look ahead to GGW Chapter 7, and find the cases at  pp. 506-512, 607-621. Paper option #6 is due in class today. All students must turn in at least two papers by today.

Recommended reading: Charles Lane, The Day Freedom Died: The Colfax Massacre, the Supreme Court, and the Betrayal of Reconstruction.

VI. The Constitution and the Rise of Industrial Capitalism

We turn our attention now to constitutional development in the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century. Gillman, Graber, and Whittington refer to this as “the Republican era,” since the Republican Party dominated the federal government for most of this time. Historians often refer to this period as “the Gilded Age” to emphasize the extravagant wealth of the newly emerging capitalist elite. And Supreme Court scholars often call it “the Lochner era” to emphasize the Court’s protection of economic liberties in cases like Lochner v. New York (1905). Whatever you call it, our primary focus here will be the myriad ways in which the Constitution was reshaped by the rise of industrial capitalism from the late nineteenth century until the onset of the Great Depression. In this context, we will consider the scope of state and federal authority to curtail corporate monopolies, to regulate wages and working conditions, to prohibit child labor, and the like. We will also attend to the constitutional impact of World War I, particularly in the area of freedom of speech. 

Note that in addition to the readings in GGW and O’Brien, there are a number of Supreme Court decisions listed on the syllabus that are available on-line. Be sure to attend to these readings as well. 

Tues., Nov. 2: From Congressional to Presidential Government 

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 498-505, 512-520, 578-604, 647-649 

Thurs., Nov. 4: Congress and the Court Confront Industrial Capitalism

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 520-547

Fri., Nov. 5: Focus for discussion: Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918). Be sure to read pp. 533-535 of GGW chapter seven before your section. Take a look also at pp. 546-547. What kind of Constitution is it that would prevent the people's elected representatives from outlawing child labor? Does this decision signal that something is (or was) fundamentally wrong with our Constitution? Paper option #7 is due in class today.  

Tues., Nov. 9: Democracy and Economic Liberty in the Lochner Era

Note that the assigned pages here cover some material that we've already discussed. The 1873 Slaughter-House Cases had a substantial impact on late-19th and 20th century constitutional development, and they remain the subject of significant constitutional conflict today, so I recommend reviewing them again.

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 562-566, 568-577, 605-617, 621-639

• O'Brien, pp. 290-292

Thurs., Nov. 11: From Property Rights to Civil Liberties

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 552-561, 617-621, 640-646

• Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) (on line)

• Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) (on line)

• O'Brien, pp. 1378-1383, 1247-1248, 967-978, 373-375

• Reynolds v. U.S. (1878) (on line)

• Davis v. Beason (1890) (on line)

Fri., Nov. 12: Focus for discussion: Lochner v. New York (1905). Be sure to read pp. 630-636 of GGW chapter 7 before your section. Paper option #8 is due in class today.  

Tues., Nov. 16: Free Speech During Wartime

• GGW Chapter 7, pp. 550-552

• O'Brien, 419-433

• Abrams v. U.S. (1919) (on line)

• Whitney v. California (1927) (on line)

VII. The New Deal and the Birth of Modern Constitutionalism

In the wake of the Great Depression, the original Constitution was again significantly altered. Some scholars argue that these changes were the most significant since Reconstruction. Unlike that earlier period of constitutional change, however, no formal amendments were enacted this time. How then did these constitutional changes come about? And what exactly were they? Has the economic crisis of 2008-09 required any similar constitutional changes? If not, why not?  

Thurs., Nov. 18: The New Deal Realignment and Constitutional Conflict

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 664-669, 672-683, 706-711, 732-741, 763-771 

Fri., Nov. 19: Focus for discussion: FDR's undelivered speech on the Gold-Clause Cases and his fireside chat on the Court-packing plan. Be sure to read pp. 764-769 of GGW chapter 8 before your section. Paper option #9 is due in class today.  

Tues., Nov. 23: Exam review. No new reading.

Thurs., Nov. 25: Thanksgiving Day. No class.

Fri., Nov. 26: No sections this week.

Tues., Nov. 30: A New Constitution for a New Age

• O'Brien, pp. 251-257, 292-297

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 669-670, 683-695, 711-718

Thurs., Dec. 2: The Birth of Modern Civil Liberties

When you read U.S. v. Carolene Products (1938), be sure to read footnote four (pp. 772-3), the most famous footnote in the Court's history.

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 771-774, 798-800

• O'Brien, pp. 1096-1104, 346-357

• Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942) (on line)

• Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942) (on line)

• O'Brien, pp. 735-741

Fri., Dec. 3: Focus for discussion: U.S. v. Carolene Products (1938). Be sure to read pp. 771-774 of GGW chapter 8 before your section. Paper option #10 is due in class today. All students must turn in at least three papers by today.

VIII. The Constitution and World War, Hot and Cold

World War II and the Cold War occasioned significant constitutional conflict. As with the Civil War and World War I, this conflict focused in particular on the scope of presidential power and the limits of political dissent during wartime. While the imperatives of war generally create great pressure for the suppression of constitutional rights, note that this period witnessed a number of key early steps on the road toward the "rights revolution" of the mid-20th century. If you printed the full text of GGW Chapter 8, be sure to save it for next semester, as we'll be using it again in Con Law II; we'll be using the O'Brien book as well.

Tues., Dec. 7: Civil Rights and Liberties at War

• Minersville v. Gobitis (1940) (on line)

• O'Brien, pp. 655-664 

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 741-749

• O'Brien, pp. 433-444

• Feiner v. New York (1951) (on line) 

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 750-760

• O'Brien, pp. 1383-1385

Thurs., Dec. 9: War and the Modern Presidency

• Ex parte Quirin (1942) (on line)

• GGW Chapter 8, pp. 719-732, 760-762

Fri., Dec. 10: Focus for discussion: Exam review. No new reading, but as you prepare for the exam, this detailed table of contents for GGW may be helpful. Note, in particular, the topical outline that appears at pp. 14-22. In addition, your participation self-assessments (described in the Course Expectations section above) are due in sections. 

Friday Dec. 17: From 5:15-7:15 pm, we will have a comprehensive, closed-book final exam in our regular classroom.