Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Oral Arguments

Here. Start at; login, then go to "Media" and down to "Wasserman."

Great job today. Have a great break.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Oral Arguments - 11th Circuit

The 11th Circuit will be holding oral arguments in Miami from December 6-9.  These arguments are on challenging legal issues and a great experience to witness. See link below:

Monday, November 21, 2016

Younger Commentaries

Here and here.

Oral Arguments

Schedule of Oral Arguments.

Order on Supreme Court Oral Arguments.

Final Class

Last day audio.

Commentaries on Congressional Decides, as well as final commentaries from those who were scheduled for Congressional Control, are due by email to Donna Yff ( by noon on Thursday, December 1.

Friday, November 18, 2016

Can an individual citizen compel the Senate to take action on President Obama's nomination of Judge Garland to SCOTUS?

On November 17, 2016, a District Judge in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said no and dismissed the case on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not have individualized standing.  See link below:

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

For Monday (Final Class)

Wednesday audio. Younger Commentaries due at the beginning of class. Opinions due at the beginning of class. All other Commentaries due on Thursday, December 1, by email to Donna Yff ( in the registrar.

We continue with the final, and central, principle from Klein, at issue in Bank Markazi. What is that principle and why has no law ever violated it? Why was the law in Bank Markazi valid? What was the dispute between the majority and dissent over three hypotheticals: 1) A law that said "In Smith v. Jones, Smith wins;" 2) A law saying "The letter from the neighbor shall be conclusive evidence of the boundary;" and 3) A law saying "Smith wins so long as the claim was timely filed and service was proper." Prepare to analyze the three assigned laws (Schiavo, the PLCAA, and FISA) under the various Klein principles.

Finally, time permitting, we will look at two proposals regarding the size and structure of SCOTUS and the manner of appointments, both of which have become the subject of political dispute in the past year. The first is the "Proposal on Life Tenure" (at right). The second has been made here and here by Prof. Eric Segall of Georgia State. Are these proposals valid under Article III? Are they a good idea to address problems of longevity and the politicization of the appointments process.