321 - 330 of 388 results for: LAW

From at least Brown v. Board of Education, and many would say before that, education has been central to racial justice movements in America. More than fifty years after Brown, most American schools remain segregated by race and class, and many advocates still argue that the struggle for quality education is the key civil rights issue of our time. This course will examine a host of education-related legal and policy issues that intersect with questions of race and class. Topics will include: desegregation and re-segregation, tracking, charter schools, school vouchers, high-stakes testing, the Common Core, school discipline, the "school to prison pipeline," and education in alternative schools, juvenile facilities, and adult prisons. This will be a discussion-oriented course that will operate more like a seminar than a lecture. This class is limited to 30 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (20 students will be selected by lottery) and students from the School of Education (10 students). Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

(Formerly Law 577) This course is intended to give students a basic understanding of the themes in the legal regulation of elections and politics. We will cover all the major Supreme Court cases on topics of voting rights, reapportionment/redistricting, ballot access, regulation of political parties, campaign finance, and the 2000 presidential election controversy. The course pays particular attention to competing political philosophies and empirical assumptions that underlie the Court's reasoning while still focusing on the cases as litigation tools used to serve political ends. Law students enrolled in this class will have the option of participating in a one-week extension of the course ( Law 7056) in Delhi, India during spring break for an additional credit. Students may enroll for this course alone or for both this course and Law 7056. The overseas option is limited to 12 students. (See Law 7056 for application instructions and deadline). Elements used in grading: Class participation and exam. Cross-listed with Communication ( COMM 361) and Political Science ( POLISCI 327C).

(Formerly Law 614) This survey course will cover historical and contemporary policy debates about poverty in the U.S. Topics will include the constitutional treatment of poverty, as well as the legal and policy treatment of questions of access to specific social goods, such as housing, health care, education, and legal services. We will also discuss "hot topics" in the field, such as criminalization of poverty, international perspectives on poverty, wage theft, and recent policy analyses at the 20th anniversary of welfare reform. Materials will include practice-derived materials as well as scholarly treatment of the issues. Students with a range of backgrounds and perspectives on the issues are encouraged to enroll. While a survey class, lecturing will be minimal, with student leadership of and participation in discussion will be principal methodology. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Exam.

(Formerly Law 393) The way in which the law responds to violations of rights is no less important than the way in which those rights are allocated. The law of remedies determines the law's response to violations of rights, and in so doing, it delineates their boundaries and gives them legal meaning. Hence, the study of the law of remedies is closely related to the study of the substantive law, each field shedding light on the other. This course focuses on remedies in Contracts and Torts, referring to the goals of the substantive law to better understand the remedial law. It explores the law of damages in both Contracts and Torts and covers topics such as: restitutionary damages; probabilistic recoveries; offsetting benefits and offsetting risks; liquidated damages; damages for pure economic losses; and damages for severe bodily injury and death. The course also covers the remedies of specific performance in Contracts and injunction in Torts and compares and contrasts these remedies with monetary ones. Some of the defenses available to both the breaching party and the wrongdoer, such as mitigation of damages and comparative fault, in Torts and Contracts will also be discussed. Finally, the course will explores a new topic, recently identified in scholarly writings, which is "Aggregation of Claims." Elements used in grading: Exam.

(Formerly Law 490) This seminar explores Reproductive Justice ("RJ") as a paradigm for understanding reproductive oppression -- that is, the subordination of individuals through their bodies, sexualities, and abilities to reproduce. The RJ paradigm picks up where a reproductive rights framework ends. It contends that the fight for equality and dignity in matters relating to reproduction continues beyond a successful argument that the Constitution ought to protect a "right" to privacy, "right" to access contraception, or "right" to an abortion. An RJ framework observes that "rights" are given meaning -- and lose meaning -- according to the race, class, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, immigration status, and physical and mental ability (among other attributes) of the rights bearer. As such, RJ analyzes reproductive experiences within a complex context and with respect to the multiple statuses of the persons involved. This seminar will explore RJ as it speaks to assisted reproductive technologies, health care policy, immigration, incarceration, environmental justice, and economic inequality, among other topics. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. This class meets during the first two weeks of Winter Quarter.

(Formerly Law 572) This seminar explores strategic and legal issues related to using law reform and social justice litigation to advance the constitutional and civil rights of vulnerable communities, particularly with regard to litigation against the federal government. The focus this quarter will be examining the role of litigation in response to some current federal initiatives, particularly but not exclusively with regard to the rights of non-citizens. No previous experience or study of immigration law is expected; the seminar is open to all 2L and 3L students interested in the topic. The course will be informed by the instructor's thirty years of litigating class action and appellate cases, including in the Supreme Court, as the founder and former national director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project and recent service in the Obama administration as senior counselor to the Secretary of Homeland Security. The seminar is designed to analyze doctrinal and strategic litigation responses to issues of broad public policy and social justice. Among the topics that may be included are selecting and using test cases; identifying plaintiffs; coalition litigation; strategic pleading; class action problems; the role of amicus briefs; suits for damages versus injunctive relief; standing and mootness; ethical problems; settlement strategies; use of public advocacy and media; the effect of lawsuits on policymakers and public officials; the role of government and agency lawyers; and litigation to achieve legislative change. Guest speakers will be invited. Enrollment is limited and the seminar is not open to 1L students. Students will either (a) submit a series of reflections or analytical pieces (totaling 18 pages) responding to seminar issues and guest speakers or (b) request approval for Research (R) credit to write a substantial research paper on an approved topic of current significance. R credit is available only with the instructor's prior consent early in the quarter. Students approved for R credit will transfer from section (01) into section (02) after the term begins. Elements used in grading: Class participation (50%) and written submissions (50%). CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline. A background in immigration law is not required for this seminar.

(Formerly Law 425) Statutory law is the dominant source of contemporary law, and it is the form of law that lawyers are likely to confront most often in almost any area of practice. It is also an area of vibrant intellectual debate, as scholars, Supreme Court justices, and others debate the methods and aims of statutory interpretation. This course will stress both the practical and theoretical dimensions of interpretation. Students will learn and apply the methods of statutory interpretation. We will also spend considerable time on contemporary controversies, such as debates about textualist, purposive and dynamic interpretation; about the use of legislative history and canons of construction; about the special interpretive problems that arise in the context of direct democracy; and about the democratic and constitutional foundations of statutory interpretation itself. Readings will draw from political science as well as law. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam.

(Formerly Law 715B) Recent events in our country have dramatically highlighted the fact that we are not a post-racial society, and that structural racism and implicit bias are as harmful to people and institutions as intentional discrimination. Currently, plaintiffs can only show a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment - and several other antidiscrimination laws - by proving intentional discrimination. This seminar will examine this "intent standard" and its significant barriers to racial justice litigation. The course will review social science research, including studies on implicit bias, racial anxiety, stereotyping, and other concepts, to explore how contemporary discrimination manifests. We will address how legal advocates and the law can utilize such research to challenge and remedy discrimination through strategic litigation. We will examine real-world examples of this, including in the context of school discipline and the school-to-prison pipeline. Meeting dates: This class will meet on three Fridays, October 21, October 28 and November 4. Students must attend all three classes. Early drop deadline: Students may not drop this course after the first class. Elements used in grading: Written assignments (reflection papers) and class participation.

(Formerly Law 606) This seminar provides students with the opportunity to analyze, argue, hear oral arguments and draft opinions in cases that are currently pending before the Supreme Court of the United States. Professor Lawrence Marshall will serve as the instructor in the seminar, and several of the Law School's esteemed group of Supreme Court litigators are expected to participate in one or more of the sessions. The 18 students in the seminar will be divided into two courts. During each sitting, one of the courts will hear arguments in a case currently pending before the Supreme Court, while two of the students from the court not sitting that week will present oral arguments. The cases chosen will provide a mix of constitutional and statutory issues, as well as a mix between criminal and civil cases. Each student will be assigned the role of a particular Justice for the entire quarter. Each student's task while sitting on cases is to do his or her best to understand that particular justice, based on that justice's prior opinions and judicial philosophy. In this sense, the seminar is also intended to help promote insight into the role of judicial personality and philosophy within the decisional process. The weekly seminars will proceed as follows: In preparation for each week's session, all students (whether they are the two students arguing that week, the nine students judging that week, or the seven students observing that week) will read the lower courts' decisions, the briefs (the party briefs and selected amicus briefs) and the major precedents implicated. During the first portion of each week's session (approximately one hour), two of the students (who are members of the Court that is not sitting that week) will present oral arguments to the nine "justices" sitting that week. The arguments will be based on the briefs that were actually filed in the case. During the second segment of each week's session (approximately 45 minutes), the "justices" who are sitting that week will "conference" the case while the other non-sitting students, students who argued, instructors and guests will observe. Again, each student will be in the role of a particular justice. At the end of the "conference," the opinion-writing will be assigned to one "justice" in the majority and one "justice" in the dissent. During the final portion of each session (approximately one hour), the instructors, guests and students will engage in a broad discussion of what they just observed. This may include analysis of the briefing, discussion about the oral argument, reflections on the "conference," and, more generally, a discussion about the case and its significance. After each class, the student assigned to draft the majority opinion will have two weeks to circulate a draft to the "Court." The student writing the dissent will then have two weeks to circulate his or her opinion. The other sitting "justices" can join one of these opinions, request some changes as a condition of joining, or decide to write separately. Over the course of the Quarter, then, each student will argue one case, sit on four or five cases, and draft at least one opinion. Special instructions: 1. Because this is a simulation with assigned roles, students who are accepted into the seminar may not drop without permission of the instructor. 2. Because of the nature of the writing projects (with extensive interaction with other students), the normal deadline for Winter Quarter papers is waived and final papers must be submitted by the Spring Quarter deadline. Elements used in grading: Students will be graded based on the quality of their participation as justices, their oral argument, and their written opinions.