Law and Society (PSC/WSP 374)

Introduction to Law and Politics
PSC 200

Spring 2008
Syracuse University

Instructor: Tom Keck	Teaching Assistant: Jason Plume
Phone: 315-443-5862 (ofc)	Email: jsplume@maxwell.syr.edu
E-mail: tmkeck@maxwell.syr.edu	Ofc hrs: W 12:00-2:00, Eggers 024
Ofc hrs: T, Th 2:00-3:20 p.m., Eggers 510

Class Time and Location:

Course Content and Objectives

In this course, we will explore the role of law and courts in the American polity. To do so, we will use a variety of books and films that each examines one particular legal dispute in some detail. The specific cases will vary from year to year, but they will be drawn from across the spectrum of the American legal system: civil disputes and criminal disputes, petty crimes and capital crimes, local trials and Supreme Court landmarks.

Course Readings

The following books have been ordered at the SU Bookstore and have also been placed on two-hour reserve at Bird Library:

D. Graham Burnett. 2002. A Trial by Jury. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN: 0-375-72751-5.
Louis Fisher. 2005. Nazi Saboteurs on Trial: A Military Tribunal and American Law. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ISBN: 0-7006-1387-0.
Jonathan Harr. 1996. A Civil Action. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN: 0-679-77267-7.
Philippa Strum. 2002. Women in the Barracks: The VMI Case and Equal Rights. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ISBN: 0-7006-1336-6.

Some of the required readings for the course (those that are underlined) are available on the internet and are linked from the on-line version of this syllabus. If you find any links in this syllabus which are not working, please let me know ASAP. It is your responsibility to obtain (and read!) the required readings prior to the day that we discuss them in class.

Course Requirements

Course grades will be based on three 5-7 page papers (22.5% each), an in-class final exam (17.5%), and class participation (15%).

Paper assignments (22.5% each, 67.5% total)

Choose three of the following options. Note that each option has a different due date. All students must choose at least one of the papers due by October 11th (i.e., options #1 or 2). All students registered in WSP 374 must choose option #5. With those two stipulations, the choice is yours. For each of your selections, answer the question in a paper of 5-7 pages, typed and double-spaced. For further details on my paper expectations, click here.

Option 1 (Due Tuesday, September 27)

Describe and evaluate the arguments of the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA), which you can find on the organization's website. What does ATRA mean by "tort reform"? Do you agree with their proposals? All of them? Some of them? None of them? Are civil juries out of control, awarding irrationally high jury verdicts against wealthy corporations every time a sympathetic litigant walks into court? Are the American people too litigious -- i.e., too eager to file lawsuits every time something bad happens to us? Do punitive damage awards serve any rational purpose? Support your argument with a careful analysis and discussion of the case described by Jonathan Harr in A Civil Action (as well as any other cases you find relevant).

Option 2 (Due Tuesday, October 11)

Describe and evaluate the arguments of the American Jury Institute/Fully Informed Jury Association (AJI/FIJA), which you can find on the organization's website. What is "jury nullification"? Can jurors legitimately exercise this power? Why or why not? If they can, should they be informed of this fact? More broadly, what is the purpose of the jury system? How well are juries fulfilling this purpose today? Do we place too much trust in the capacity of ordinary citizens to overcome their prejudices and seek the truth? You should focus primarily on the criminal jury system, and support your argument with reference to A Trial by Jury (along with any other relevant readings or materials). If it proves relevant, however, feel free to discuss the civil jury as well, with reference to A Civil Action.

Option 3 (Due Thursday, October 20)

Reflecting on the books by Harr and Burnett, and the film about the Randall Adams case, how confident are you in the ability of trial courts to pinpoint "the truth" about a past event? Are these cases representative in this regard, or are they unusual? Is there some particular aspect of the trial system that causes mistakes to be made? Is Jerome Frank's diagnosis correct? How might we improve the system in this regard?

Option 4 (Due Tuesday, November 8)

In a 2003 decision in the Yasser Hamdi case, Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that:

The importance of limitations on judicial activities during wartime may be inferred from the allocation of powers under our constitutional scheme. . . . The war powers . . . invest the President, as Commander in Chief, with the power to wage war which Congress has declared, and to carry into effect all laws passed by Congress for the conduct of war and for the government and regulation of the Armed Forces, and all laws defining and punishing offences against the law of nations, including those which pertain to the conduct of war. These powers include the authority to detain those captured in armed struggle. These powers likewise extend to the executive's decision to deport or detain alien enemies during the duration of hostilities, and to confiscate or destroy enemy property.
Article III contains nothing analogous to the specific powers of war so carefully numerated in Articles I and II. In accordance with this constitutional text, the Supreme Court has shown great deference to the political branches when called upon to decide cases implicating sensitive matters of foreign policy, national security, or military affairs.
The reasons for this deference are not difficult to discern. Through their departments and committees, the executive and legislative branches are organized to supervise the conduct of overseas conflict in a way that the judiciary simply is not. The Constitution's allocation of the warmaking powers reflects not only the expertise and experience lodged within the executive, but also the more fundamental truth that those branches most accountable to the people should be the ones to undertake the ultimate protection and to ask the ultimate sacrifice from them. Thus the Supreme Court has lauded the operation of a healthy deference to legislative and executive judgments in the area of military affairs.

Hamdi appealed to the Supreme Court, which reversed Wilkinson's decision by an 8-1 vote, though several of the justices agreed with Wilkinson in part. Do you agree with Judge Wilkinson that federal judges should exercise their authority with great restraint during wartime? Why or why not?

Option 5 (Due Tuesday, December 6)

In our constitutional system, under what circumstances, if any, are government institutions allowed to treat men and women differently? Do the spare words of the Fourteenth Amendment answer this question? If not, where else should we turn for an answer? In supporting your argument, be sure to discuss the VMI case and the jury selection cases we read earlier in the semester.

Final exam (17.5%)

On Thursday, December 15, at 7:15 p.m., we will have a two-hour, in-class, closed-book, comprehensive exam. As we approach the end of the semester, I will give you some guidance regarding the content and format of this exam.

Class participation (15%)

As the semester progresses, you will note that my classroom lectures/discussions will sometimes be closely linked to the assigned readings, while at other times they will emphasize new material that you have not read. To complete the written assignments effectively, you will need to be familiar with both the course readings and the classroom lectures. As an added incentive to participate, 15% of your grade will be based on your contributions to class discussion.

This does not mean that you have to come to class with a fully developed point of view about every issue addressed in the reading. It does mean that you need to complete the readings on time and come to class with some thoughts or questions in response to those readings. 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 are working toward a mastery of the material.

Your participation grade will be assigned as follows: During our final class session, you should submit a one-page self-assessment of your class participation. In this self-assessment, you should 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 sort of 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 and I will read your self-assessment, compare it with our own perceptions, and then assign you a participation grade.

Course Policies

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 the paper to me, along with a brief, typed explanation of the grounds for your appeal. On all such appeals, I will re-grade the assignment from scratch, which 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 misconduct: SU's Academic Rules and Regulations require students to "exhibit honesty in all academic endeavors. Cheating in any form is not tolerated, nor is assisting another person to cheat. The submission of any work by a student is taken as a guarantee that the thoughts and expressions in it are the student's own except when properly credited to another. Violations of this principle include giving or receiving aid in an exam or where otherwise prohibited, fraud, plagiarism, . . . or any other deceptive act in connection with academic work. Plagiarism is the representation of another's words, ideas, programs, formulae, opinions, or other products of work as one's own, either overtly or by failing to attribute them to their true source" (Syracuse University Bulletin 2003-2004: p. 2). In addition to these rules, you may not submit written work in this class that has also been submitted in another class, unless you have received express permission to do so from the instructors of both classes. If you are caught violating any of these rules, my policy is to give an F for the course and then refer the matter to the Student Standards Committee for additional action.

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 have any disability that may prevent you from fully demonstrating your abilities in this course, you should contact me as soon as possible to discuss accommodations necessary to ensure your full participation and to facilitate your educational opportunities.

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. I have also set up a listserv for the course, to which all students will be subscribed during the first week of class. To post a message to the listserv, send it to law_and_society@listserv.syr.edu. Contributions to the listserv will be counted toward the class participation portion of your grade.

Course Schedule

Tuesday, August 30: The McDonald's Coffee Case

Introduction. No reading for today. We will go over the course logistics, and we will also begin discussing the American civil justice system -- i.e., the system of law and courts designed to resolve disputes between two or more private parties.

Thursday, September 1

Class is cancelled today, as I will be in Washington at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. If necessary, we may make up this time with an extra session later in the semester. In the meantime, you should begin reading A Civil Action. As you do so, continue thinking about the questions we raised in class on Tuesday. What are the main purposes of the civil justice system? How well is it serving these goals in actual practice? Is the civil justice system a place where every person with a dispute can expect a fair and impartial resolution of a conflict? Or are some groups and interests better served by the system than others? Which groups and interests? Perhaps most importantly, there is a common perception that Americans are too litigious -- i.e., that we are too eager to file lawsuits every time something bad happens to us. Is this perception accurate? If you weren't in class on Tuesday, make sure to read this Newsweek article on American litigiousness as well.

I. Anatomy of a Civil Dispute

Tuesday, September 6

A. Are Americans too litigious?

Today, we will continue our discussion of the civil justice system by thinking about why certain civil disputes have been such newsworthy political events in recent years. In addition to getting started on A Civil Action, you should also browse the websites of the American Tort Reform Association and Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (TLPJ). What do these organizations think of the American civil justice system? How do their descriptions differ? Why do they differ? Which one seems more accurate and persuasive?

Harr, 1-82

Thursday, September 8

B. A short introduction to civil procedure

If you go to law school, you can take an entire semester-long course on civil procedure. We cannot hope to cover everything, of course, but we will spend today looking at how the process of resolving a civil dispute actually works, beginning with someone's initial perception that someone else has harmed her, and ending with the filing of the final judgment in the case. Would it surprise you to know that these technical procedural rules have been the subject of great political controversy? As you continue reading about the Woburn leukemia case, think about how well the civil justice process seems to be working for Anne Anderson, W.R. Grace, and everyone else involved.

Harr, 83-194

Tuesday, September 13

C. A brief history of the civil justice system

The civil law includes three major branches -- property, contracts, and torts -- but we have been focusing on tort law, which is the law of private harms. When someone harms you in some way that is legally "actionable," tort law provides you with a means of legal redress. For example, if you cross the street at a crosswalk, and I run a stop sign and hit you with my car, you can file a personal injury lawsuit to force me to pay for your medical expenses, lost wages, and the like. The principal purpose of tort law, in fact, is to allow people who have been harmed by others to receive some form of compensation. Does this system seem like the best way to provide adequate and appropriate compensation in such instances? How well is it working in this regard? Does it serve any other useful societal purposes?

Harr, 195-290

Thursday, September 15

D. Tort law and the civil jury

Harr, 291-401

Tuesday, September 20

E. Dispute resolution in the American legal system

Harr, 402-494