For our discussion on the second assignment about the "Great Debate" (Handout No. 2) regarding original understanding vs. the "Living Constitution," I would also like you to read the Sup Ct's recent same-sex marriage decision. Here is a link:
Obergefell
v Hodges (2015)
For now, I would like you to focus on the question whether Obergefell is a legitimate interpretation of the Written Constitution or whether it is an exercise of raw judicial power. Are you convinced that the Constitution was written to provide a redefinition of marriage? Is this an issue committed to the federal judiciary by the written Constitution? Or is it an issue that should be decided by the process of democratic self-government in the states?
In other words, let's use Obergefell as a case study of the Great Debate over how the Constitution should be read.
So, to be clear, for Thursday's class the Assignment is Handout No. 2 (on the Great Debate) plus Obergefell.
-
I. Tinker A student's right to speak (even on controversial subjects such as war) in the cafeteria, the playing field, or "on the...
-
Monday August 28 : Handout on Moore v Harper (PDF has been emailed to you); Originalism vs. the "Living Constitution": Strau...
-
Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop (art by Joshua Duncan) "We may not shelter in place when the C...
No comments:
Post a Comment