Professor Renteln Fall 2016 1 Political Science 130g Midterm Study Guide The midterm examination will consist of two parts. For Part I you will choose 6 out of 10 short answer questions (worth 60%). Be sure to describe the item and then analyze it; explain its significance for the course. The best answers will include material from readings, lectures, and section discussions. The questions will be similar to the examples below. For Part II you will write an essay on one of two topics. Below is one sample question. PART I: Possible items for short answer questions are listed below, although the list is not entirely comprehensive. Note that items are grouped in clusters; you may be asked define the concept, or to describe the case and indicate what principle it represents. Be sure to explain the significance of the ID, that is, how the item relates to the larger themes of the course. Refer to the course syllabus to review these. Case of the Mignonette/doctrine of necessity William v. Walker Thomas Furniture Co./doctrine of unconscionability deontological/teleological Schools of jurisprudence: Natural Law, Legal Positivism, and Historical School Lon Fuller H.L.A. Hart (rule of recognition) Nazi wife case/retroactivity Frederick Karl von Savigny (Volksgeist) Sir Henry Maine (legal evolution) Eugen Ehrlich (“living law”) “Brandeis Brief” Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Legal Realism Paul Bohannan/Double institutionalization enemy combatants Boumediene v. Bush Ronald Dworkin writ of habeas corpus stare decisisProfessor Renteln Fall 2016 2 ratio decidendi/obiter dicta Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell Socratic method case method Duncan Kennedy “hot case” Marc Galanter - repeat players vs. one shotters “transformation of disputes” stratified bar - solicitors/barristers American Bar Association solo practitioner/corporate counsel/in-house counsel Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State U.S. Attorney Model Rules of Professional Conduct Toyota corporation Gideon v. Wainright In forma pauperis Legal Services Corporation Public safety exception Inevitable discovery exception Pro bono publico contingency fee State Bar v. Arizona attorney-client privilege Nix v. Whiteside Robert Garrow Monroe Friedman New York v. Quarles/ “public safety exception” “inevitable discovery exception” “The Christian burial speech” Moran v. Burbine Miranda v. Arizona Dickerson v. U.S. Rochin v. California/“conduct that shocks the conscience” Valerie Han Taylor v. Louisiana voir dire peremptory challenge Batson v. Kentucky Hernandez v. New YorkProfessor Renteln Fall 2016 3 William Penn jury nullification John Peter Zenger “Twelve Angry Men” jury consultants Gag order National Jury Project “death-qualified” jury Williams v. Florida Ballew v. Georgia Unanimity rule Johnson v. Louisiana Apodaca v. Oregon in forma pauperis Charlan Nemeth Change of venue Sequestration Forum shopping dual court system – relative merits of state versus federal court new judicial federalism/independent state grounds Serrano v. Priest San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez Hans Linde/Frank Newman/William Brennan Pruneyard case Belleterre case Adamson v. California constraints on law enforcement body cameras “stop and frisk” Mapp v. Ohio exclusionary rule “Broken Windows” George Kellner and James Q. Wilson The Iron First and the Velvet Glove Abner Louima Rodney King Eric Garner “I don’t know,” “I am dying,” and “I am choking”. parens patriae In re GaultProfessor Renteln Fall 2016 4 Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales BlackLivesMatter Winston v. Lee (Surgical search) selective incapacitation predictive policing the presumption of innocence plea bargaining Recidivism freedom of the press vs. right to a fair trial Shepard v. Maxwell cameras in the courtroom Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart Richmond Newspapers Inc., v. Virginia prior restraint incorporation prohibition against advisory opinions standing – injury requirement Sierra Club v. Morton SCRAP Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife City of Los Angeles v. Lyons Should Trees Have Standing? Gary Gilmore mootness and exceptions; “wrongs capable of repetition but evading review” Roe v. Wade ripeness The Hatch Act political question doctrine or “too hot to handle” doctrine – foreign policy (Goldwater v. Carter), constitutional amendments, republican form of government clause (Colegrove v. Green) malapportionment Baker v. Carr judicial immunity Stump v. Sparkman crime control versus due process res judicata Solicitor General amicus curiae Justice Clarence Thomas Erwin ChemerinskyProfessor Renteln Fall 2016 5 The Judiciary Act of 1789 American Judicature Society Merit Plan Tani Cantil-Sakauye Malcolm Lucas senatorial courtesy Robert Bork compassion King Solomon Missouri plan/Merit Plan Republican Party v. White impeachment Caperton v. Massey Sample short answer questions: Give two criticisms of legal education, including Duncan Kennedy’s critique. What is Freedman’s “trilemma”, and how was it relevant in two cases we studied? Define the new judicial federalism, identify an advocate of this approach, and describe its use in one court case. Should mice have standing to challenge research policies at universities? Explain what Professor Stone’s position would be on this matter. What is the Merit Plan, and what benefits does it provide? Discuss 3 ethical problems we studied associated with jury decisionmaking in the U.S. including one that you observed in Twelve Angry Men.Professor Renteln Fall 2016 6 Part II. Essay (Worth 40%) Sample question A. Due process is guaranteed in the American legal system, and yet many practices threaten to undermine it. How does Michelle Alexander interpret trends in the judicial analysis of criminal justice policies and their implications for the fairness of America judicial proceedings? (You may wish to consider policies such as the War on Drugs, the Debtor’s Prison, and Racial Profiling.) After outlining her treatment of these, offer a critique of her main claims. We will provide blue books, so no need to bring any. Please do bring pens rather than pencils. Write on one side of the page. Have your USC ID card with you. You will leave your backpacks and other materials in the front of the room. Nota bene: You will stay in Taper 101 for the duration of