Dear Students,
Here are the written questions I'd like you to consider this week (week 7). I'll have these posted in BlackBoard soon, but here's a head start.
2301: This week we are discussing how the concept of individual liberty is written into the Constitution and contained in the substantive and procedural freedoms established in the Bill of Rights. These freedoms force us to live in a world where people say things we'd rather they not. But these freedoms are not absolute.
As we will see, the Supreme Court has placed limits on speech depending on the degree to which a speech act has led to an action that is illegal or causes a damage of some sort. Currently there are two topical issues related to speech that some would like to punish. One involving the Westboro Baptist Church's protests at funerals (among many other places) and the other involving Cyber-Bullying. The case involving the former has just been argued before the Supreme Court, some blog posts below take you to the relevant links. I want you to pretend that you are a justice on the Supreme Court and you have just heard the argument. How would you decide the case? What argument wold you make and what precedence supports your position?
2302: Glenn Beck has recently focused attention (and animosity) on the presidency of Woodrow Wilson. Part of the argument is the standard conservative claim that Wilson expanded government beyond what was permissible from a strict constructionist's point of view, and did things as president that were previously not done, and ought not have been done. In other posts I've provided links to additional information about Wilson. I want you to use this information to assess his presidency and consider Beck's arguments. Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?
