PLS 308: AMERICAN JUDICIAL POLITICS

Winter 2007

 

 

Prof. Kevin R. den Dulk

Office hours:   TTh 1:00-2:15 (1126 ASH) or by appointment

Email: dendulkk@gvsu.edu

Phone:             331-2991

 

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course invites you to join several ongoing debates about the role of law in American politics and society.  We begin by considering some of the ways of understanding the relationship between the rule of law and democracy, ranging from conservative to radical, and then proceed to assess the political participation and influence of major actors in the legal system.  We will then look at the influences on and impact of judicial review and constitutional rights in our constitutional system, as well as some other national models.

 

PLS 308 fulfills an American politics requirement in GVSU’s political science major.  For more information about the Department of Political Science, visit our blog at http://gvps.typepad.com.

 

 

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Your grade is determined by your performance in the three areas: exams, written assignments, and participation.  Failure to complete any single requirement will result in a failing grade for the course.  Deadlines are etched in stone, except in documented cases of serious illness, family emergencies, or other dire and unavoidable occurrences.  Assignments lose a FULL letter grade for each day they are late. 

 

(1)   EXAMS:  There will be a midterm (20%) and final examination (25%). 

 

(2)   PAPERS: You will complete a short paper (15%) and final research project (25%).  Details are appended.

 

(3)   PARTICIPATION: This course demands your active and serious participation (15%).   This means two things:

 

a.       Attend.  Students who miss more than three sessions during the semester will generally lose their participation points.  Barring unavoidable and dire circumstances, students should also be in class on time and stay for the duration of our sessions, and they should not listen to music, read unrelated material, or surf the net while class is in session.  And please turn off cell phones before class begins!

 

b.      Ask questions and make arguments.  You’ll find plenty of opportunities to participate during presentations, simulations, the Blackboard discussion list, and ordinary class sessions.  I realize that speaking in public is intimidating for some of you, but now is your chance to take the plunge while the water is warm.

 

 

SOURCES FOR READINGS

The following required text is available at UBS or Brian’s Books: Diascro and Ivers’ Inside the Judicial Process.  There will also be numerous readings available online and via course e-reserve.  Visit the course website (http://www4.gvsu.edu/dendulkk/pls330/pls330.htm) to access these readings

 

 

COURSE HELP

I’m happy to speak with you during office hours, by appointment, or via email.  Consult the course website (http://www4.gvsu.edu/dendulkk/pls330/pls330.htm) for links to online readings, exam review questions, and many other helpful resources.  If you would like extra help with writing, I strongly encourage you to visit GVSU’s Writing Center (http://www4.gvsu.edu/wc).  Students with learning disabilities should seek out the Office of Academic Services (http://www4.gvsu.edu/aos).

 

 

ACADEMIC STANDARDS

Academic dishonesty is a serious ethical problem on college campuses, and plagiarism – the failure to give credit to others for their words or ideas – is particularly tempting in this course.  Any instance of academic dishonesty will result in a failing grade for the assignment and notification of the Dean; at my discretion, it may also result in failure for the course.  If you have questions about academic misconduct, talk to me or consult GVSU’s Student Code (http://www.gvsu.edu/students/student-code.pdf), Article II, Sect. 223.

 

 

OUTLINE OF THE COURSE

Readings must be completed by the first day we will consider a specific topic unless I note otherwise.

 

Introduction: Rule of Law and Democracy (January 9, 11, 16)

 

Overview of American Law and Politics (January 18, 23)

  • Readings:  Baum, American Courts, Ch. 2 (e-reserve)

 

Actors and Institutions: Juries (January 25, 30, February 1)

  • Readings: Tocqueville, “Trial By Jury in the United States…” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 281-84); Miller-El v. Cockrell (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 284-90); United States v. Booker (Diascro/Ivers, pp. pp. 300-04); Jury Instructions (online)

 

NOTE: Jury Deliberation Simulation on January 25

 

Actors and Institutions: Lawyers (February 6, 8, 13)

  • Readings:  Tocqueville, “The Temper of the Legal Profession…” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 193-96); Galanter, “Why the Haves Come Out Ahead” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 316-21)

 

NOTE: February 6, “The Plea” (documentary)

 

Actors and Institutions: Organized Groups / Social Movements (February 13, 15)

  • Readings:  Vose, “Litigation as a Form of Pressure Group Activity” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 244-47); O’Connor and Epstein, “Amicus Curiae Participation in the U.S. Supreme Court” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 247-50); Krishnan and den Dulk, “So Help Me God” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 264-70); Epp, The Rights Revolution (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 476-85)

 

Actors and Institutions: Judges (February 20, 22, 27)

  • Readings: Hamilton, Federalist 66 and 76 (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 125-28); Gillman, “Judicial Independence Through the Lens of Bush v. Gore (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 11-16); Russell, “Judicial Independence in Comparative Perspective” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 32-35)

 

EXAM 1: March 1, in class

 

Exercising Judicial Review: Traditional Approaches (March 13, 15, 20)

  • Readings:  Hamilton, Federalist 78 (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 5-7); Marbury v. Madison (online); Rehnquist, “The Notion of a Living Constitution” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 22-25); Marshall, “Reflections on the Bicentennial…” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 25-28)

 

Exercising Judicial Review: Attitudinal Approaches (March 20, 22)

 

Exercising Judicial Review: Institutional Approaches I (March 27, 29)

 

Exercising Judicial Review: Institutional Approaches II (April 3, 5)

  • Readings: Yates and Whitford, “The Presidency and the Supreme Court After Bush v. Gore” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 399-403); revisit Epp, The Rights Revolution; Boerne v. Flores (online)

 

Impact of Judicial Review (April 10, 12, 17)

  • Readings:  Canon and Johnson, “Responses to Judicial Policies” (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 447-57); Glendon, Rights Talk (e-reserve); Rosenberg, “The Dynamic and Constrained Court (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 457-65); McCann, Rights at Work (Diascro/Ivers, pp. 321-23);

 

Conclusions (April 19)

 

EXAM 2: April 24 (4 p.m.)

WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

You must complete both of the following written assignments.  Read the instructions carefully.  

 

For important information about style, citation, and other matters that I consider in assessing student papers, please visit http://www4.gvsu.edu/dendulkk/papers.htm.

 

 

 

SHORT PAPER:

Choose ONE of the following options.  Note that they each have a different due date.

 

Option 1:

In no more than FIVE pages, describe and evaluate the arguments for and against jury nullification in our legal system.  You might want to consider the arguments of the American Jury Institute/Fully Informed Jury Association (AJI/FIJA), which you can find on the organization's website, as well as various commentaries for and against nullification.  Be sure to define clearly what you mean by jury nullification, explain the broader context of the issue and its potential role in our legal system, and lay out your own position on the appropriateness of its use.

 

Due: February 1, in class

 

 

Option 2:

In no more than FIVE pages, write a critical analysis of one of the books listed below.  In your analysis, be sure to describe and evaluate (for clarity, coherence, etc.) the author’s basic argument or thesis (it may not be explicit, so this will require some thought), assess the type and effectiveness of the evidence the author uses, and address the political implications of the book, drawing from the themes we’ve discussed in the course.

 

Harr, A Civil Action

Lewis, Make No Law

Stern, The Buffalo Creek Disaster

 

Deadline: February 13, in class

 

 

Option 3:

There has been much discussion recently about the role of courts in wartime, particularly whether it is necessary for government officials to obtain judicial warrants to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists.  In no more than FIVE pages, discuss and evaluate the role of federal courts in addressing the constitutional claims of those surveilled or detained by the government during wartime.  In particular, the paper should focus on the work of FISA courts (established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). Be sure to explain how the separation of powers – particularly presidential power – shapes the courts’ ability to address constitutional claims.  Discuss court cases where appropriate.

 

Deadline: February 22

 

RESEARCH PAPER:

Each student will conduct an intensive research project.  There are two stages in the project:

 

1. By March 22, in NO MORE than one, single-spaced page, you will turn in a hard copy statement of a research question, your approach to answering the question, and a brief summary of three scholarly sources relevant to your topic.  At least two of these sources must be books and/or academic journal articles.

 

2.  By April 19 (at the beginning of class), you will turn in a final research paper of 8-13 pages in length.  The paper should include a statement of the research question, a brief discussion of various arguments/approaches to the question, a discussion of your approach/methodology for addressing the question, a description of your findings, and a conclusion.  Your paper will also include a bibliography with at least sources (also cited in the paper, of course).  

 

A few notes about of the project:

 

Writing: Consult http://www4.gvsu.edu/dendulkk/papers for information on bibliographic style and other matters related to writing.

 

Paper topic: The research question is up to you, though I STRONGLY encourage you to consult with me before March 22.  One topic that is NOT suitable for this project: A legal analysis of a particular area of constitutional doctrine (e.g., free speech doctrine), which is more appropriate to PLS 306 or 307.

 

Approach: Your approach (i.e., methodology) to answering the question depends on the type of question you choose to address.  If you choose an empirical project, you’ll want to use some existing data (content analysis of periodicals, group press releases, mass surveys, etc.) or generate your own dataset.  If you choose to do historical work, you’ll want to look at primary documents.  If you choose to do an analysis of judicial impact, you’ll want to look at any relevant government or think tank reports, as well as other forms of social or economic data.

 

Research resources:  A key resource at your disposal is the library (yes, you’ll want to visit the library!), which has a good (and growing) collection of books, journals, and databases (especially JSTOR and Lexis Academic) that you can use to gather information and sort through arguments. A good place to start identifying sources, incidentally, is the many references in the course textbook and other readings.  Be judicious and critical about internet sources, many of which have dubious authority or expertise.

 

 

 

.