Constitutional Law II
Howard University School of Law

Prof. Steven D. Jamar
Houston Hall 402
202-806-8017
stevenjamar@gmail.com

Syllabus
Fall 2017

HU Course No. 600-621
(revised  25 Sept. 2017)

http://sdjlaw.org/SDJ/ConLaw2/

Please note that although the syllabus shows what is planned, the course is unlikely to follow the schedule exactly. This syllabus is subject to change to address current events and ongoing developments in the law, and to meet the students' needs as perceived by the professor during the semester.

Where: HH1
When: M T Th 9:10-10:00 am

Howard University ADA Statement

Howard University is committed to providing an educational environment that is accessible to all students.  In accordance with this policy, students in need of accommodations due to a disability should contact Dean Reginald McGahee (rmcgahee@law.howard.edu) or the Office of the Dean for Special Student Services ((202)283-2420) for verification and determination of reasonable accommodations as soon as possible after admission to the University, or at the beginning of each semester.

Table of Contents

Course Overview

This course focuses on equal protection, substantive due process, freedom of speech and the press, and freedom of religion. State action is covered briefly. Procedural due process, habeas corpus, freedom of contract, and takings may also be covered briefly as time allows. Fundamental constitutional principles including separation of powers, federalism, rights as limits on governmental power, and others are necessarily included. Methods of constitutional interpretion and some of the issues relating to the various approaches are also examined. 

The course is taught primarily using cases, Socratic questioning, and discussion. Some topics are presented by lecture and some are explored primarily through working through problems in skills workshops.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of the course, the student should demonstrate mastery of the following knowledge and skills:

  • Ability to analyze a new factual situation and to determine the relevant Constitutional law issues in it
  • Ability to state and apply the relevant Constitutional law doctrine, policies, and principles to the situation to reach a conclusion about the probable outcome of it
  • Knowledge of the standard of review relevant to each type of individual right and the ability to apply it in the appropriate setting
  • Understand the changes in Constitutional law doctrine over time and the causes of those changes
  • Knowledge of and ability to use various methods of constitutional interpretation

Course Materials

Required Book and Materials

Jamar, Constitutional Law: Power, Liberty, Equality (Aspen/Wolters Kluwer 2017) ISBN 978-1-4548-7032-6

Other supplemental materials to be provided by the professor from time to time.

Recommended Books

Additional Perspectives

Brian Landsberg and Leslie Jacobs, Global Issues in Constitutional Law (Thompson West 2007)

Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution:  Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (and How We the People Can Correct It) (Oxford University Press 2006) (paperback edition 2007)

Study Aids

Mark C. Alexander, A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law (West 2013) ISBN: 9780314286055

Allan Ides & Chistopher N. May, Examples and Explanations: Constitutional Law: Individual Rights (7th ed. Aspen/Wolters Kluwer 2015)

Professor Contact Information

Office:

402 Houston Hall

Phone:

202-806-8017

Email:

stevenjamar@gmail.com (I typically respond to email within 24 hours.)

Office Hours:

The times listed below may change. I will post up-to-date office hours online at http://www.sdjlaw/SDJ/

M

10:30 am to 12:30 pm

T

12:30 pm to 2:00 pm

Th

12:30 pm to 2:00 pm


Occasionally I will not be able to keep these office hours because of other commitments. Later in the semester my office hours will be expanded.

If you need to see me at another time, please contact me by email so we can make an appointment.

I am often in my office at times not posted as office hours and during those times I am generally able to meet with students.

Grade Components

Final Examination

100 pts.

 

 

Course Requirements

Preparation

Read the assigned material before class each day. Be prepared to brief the cases orally and to discuss the problems presented by the readings. Sometimes we will delve deeply into cases while other times we will discuss topics using the cases and other text the basis for topical discussion.  In addition, there will be several workshops in class during the semester, typically at the end of a unit.  Various structures are used for the workshops, but at least one will involve group work on analyzing a hypo and sketching an answer.

Pay close attention to the standard of review in each case.

Attendance

The law school attendance policy will be enforced. If you miss 25% or more of the scheduled class sessions, starting from the first day of scheduled classes, you will receive an "F" for the course unless you formally withdraw from the course before the last day to drop a course as set by the law school academic calendar. Under the law school policy, attendance means being present at the start of class and throughout the class period. Tardy students and students who leave class early or who leave and come back will be counted as absent.

SCHEDULE

Please note that this schedule identifies the topics to be considered in the order in which they will be considered and the readings for the topics. After the first class, the specific reading for the next class will be given. Thereafter most assignments will be given on a weekly basis.

Judicial Power

Constitution: Articles 1, 2, 3 & Amends. 1, 5, & 14. Jamar, Part I; Ch. 1; Ch. 2: Marbury v. Madison (1803) pp. 15-31

Part IV: Introduction to Liberty, Rights, and Equality, pp. 601-605

Equal Protection Foundations: Jamar, Ch. 2 Foundations §2.5, pp. 96-139 (read all of it, but study closely The Slaughterhouse Cases (1873) and The Civil Rights Cases (1883))

Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) (read)
Dred Scott  v. Sandford
(1857) (read)
The Slaughterhouse Cases
(1873) (study)
Cruickshank (1876) (read)
The Civil Rights Cases
(1883) (study)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) (read)

Equal Protection: Social and Economic Regulation/Rational Basis Review: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 605-626

Williamson v. Lee Optical, Inc. (1955) pp. 611-612
Massachusetts Bd. of Retirement v. Murgia (1976) pp. 613-616
City of Cleburne, Texas v. Cleburne Living Center (1985) pp. 616-618

Equal Protection, Race, and Strict Scrutiny

Steven D. Jamar, A Brief History of Brown v. Board of Education

The Rise of Strict Scrutiny:  Korematsu, Brown, and the Early Application of Brown  Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 626-684

Korematsu v. United States (1944) pp. 627-629
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas
(1954) pp. 631-638
Loving v. Virginia
(1967) pp. 639-641

The Requirement of Intent: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 642-653

Washington v. Davis (1976) pp. 642-646
Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development
(1977) pp. 647-650
McCleskey v. Kemp
(1987) pp. 650-653

Affirmative Action on the Basis of Race: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 655-684

Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña (1995) pp. 658-670
Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin
(2016) pp. 671-682

International and Comparative Perspectives: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 684-688

Gender Classifications: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 688-701

United States v. Virginia (1996) (VMI) pp. 688-698

Classifications Regarding Aliens: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 701-708

Graham v. Richardson (1991) pp. 702-703
Ambach v. Norwick (1979) pp. 704-706

The Personal Rights Strand of Equal Protection: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 708-733

Reynolds v. Sims (1965) (voting) pp. 709-713
San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez
(1973)(education) pp. 719-725

Sexual Orientation and Equal Protection: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 726-733

Romer v. Evans (1996) pp. 726-733

The 13th Amendment and Equality: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 734-735; 351-358

Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1968)  pp. 351-358

The 15th Amendment and Equality: Jamar, Ch. 13 Equal Protection pp. 735-738; 340-348

Shelby County v. Holder (2013) pp. 340-348

Procedural Due Process: Jamar, Ch. 14 Procedural Due Process pp. 741-753

Goldberg v. Kelly (1970) pp.744-749

Optional – Habeas Corpus: Boumediene (2008), Jamar, Ch. 10 Separation of Powers §10.6 pp. 458-466

Economic Rights: Jamar, Ch. 15 Economic Rights  pp. 753-771

Contract Clause: Jamar, Ch. 15 Economic Rights pp. 753-761

Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus (1978) pp. 755-759

Takings Clause: Jamar, Ch. 15 Economic Rights pp. 761-765

The Public Use Requirement
Physical Takings
Regulatory Takings
Just Compensation

Economic Due Process: Jamar, Ch. 15 Economic Rights pp. 765-769

Substantive Due Process (Liberty & Privacy) Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 771-896

Introduction to Substantive Due Process, Unenumerated Rights, and Incorporation, Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 771-774

Incorporation and Fundamental Rights  Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 771-794

McDonald v. Chicago (2010)
Introduction to Substantive Due Process Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 794-799

Privacy:  Autonomy of Physical Self  Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 799-863

Procreation and Abortion Rights Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 863-870

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
Roe v. Wade
(1973)
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
(1992) (note case)
Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016) (note case)

Right to Die Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 826-833

Washington v. Glucksburg (1997)

Consensual Intimate Sexual Relationships Between Adults Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 833-842

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

Same Sex Marriage Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 842-860

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

Test for Substantive Due Process Rights Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 860-863

Privacy:  Control over One’s Own Information Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 863-870

NAACP v. Patterson (1958)
Whalen v. Roe
(1997)

Privacy:  Control over Private Acts with Public Attributes   Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 870-875

Michael H. v. Gerald D (1989)

Interrelationship of Substantive Due Process, Equal Protection, and Personal Rights    Jamar, Ch. 16 pp. 875-891

Travel, Residency and Durational Requirements, and State Benefits Jamar, Ch. 16 Substantive Due Process pp. 877-890

Shapiro v. Thompson (1969)
Sosna v. Iowa 419 U.S. 393 (1975) (in notes)
Sáenz v. Roe (1999)

State Action: Jamar, Ch. 21 State Action (2016) (pdf) pp. 1193-1218

Court Enforcement of Private Rights as State Action Jamar, Ch. 21 State Action pp. 1196-1202 
Shelley v. Kraemer (1948)
Evans v. Newton
(1996)
Private Actors Performing Government Functions Jamar, Ch. 21 State Action (pdf) pp. 1202-1207
Terry v. Adams (1953)
Private Entities Treated as State Actors under the Nexus Doctrine Jamar, Ch. 21 State Action pp. 1207-1216
Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. (1991)
Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority
(1961)
Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967)
Rendell-Baker v. Kohn,
457 U.S. 830 (1982)
Regulated Industries and Licensees  Jamar, Ch. 21 State Action pp. 1216-1218

Freedom of Expression: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression

ICCPR -- Sections 18, 19, 20, 22

Overview: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 897-901

Regulation of Fully Protected Speech: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 901-943

The strict scrutiny standard of review for content-based restrictions:  Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression) pp. 897-

Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona (2015)
United States v. Alvarez (2012)

Time, place, and manner restrictions: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression (2015) pp. 915-928

Ward v. Rock Against Racism (1989)

Licenses, Pemits, and Fees: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 922-928
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham (1969)

Facial or As-Applied Challenges: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 929-930

Content, Conduct, and Expressive Conduct: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 930-938

Cohen v. California (1971)

Public Forum Doctrine: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 939-940

Vagueness and Overbreadth: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 940-943

Regulation of Lesser-Protected and Unprotected Speech: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression 943-1029

Incitement, Fighting Words, True Threats, Offensive Speech, Hate Speech: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 944-963

Incitement to illegal activity: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 945-948

Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

Fighting words: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 949-952

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942)

True threats, hate speech, and offensive speech:  Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 952-961

Virginia v. Black (2003)

Defamation, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, and Privacy: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 963-987

Defamation: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 963-978

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

Restricting Freedom of Speech through Tort Law: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 978-987

Snyder v. Phelps (2011)

Obscenity, Pornography, Child Pornography, Adult Entertainment, Secondary Effects, Violence Entertainment (especially video games): Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 988-1016

Obscenity: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 990-992

Miller v. California (1973)

Broadcast Media and the Governmental Interest in Protecting Children: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 992-999

Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation (1978)

Child Pornography: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 998-1003

New York v. Ferber (1982)

Secondary Effects Doctrine: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1003-1006

Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. (1976) (note case)

Regulating Pornography Online: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1006-1013

Reno v. ACLU (1997)

Violent video games: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1013-1015

Commercial Speech: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression (2015) pp. 1016-1029

Central Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Service Commission (1980)
Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. (2011)

Special Matters: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1029-1051

Prior Restraint or “Speech presenting some grave and imminent threat the government has the power to prevent”: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1030-1034

Near v. Minnesota ex rel. Olson (1931)
New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) (note case)

Permission to Use a Public Forum pp. 1034

Campaign Financing: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1034-1044

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)
McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2014)

Government Speech and Regulating Speech of Public Employees: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1044-1050

Carcetti v. Ceballos (2006)

Speech in Public Schools: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1048-1049

Copyright: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1049-1050

Fraud & Crime: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1050-1051

Race, Social Justice, and Freedom of Expression: Jamar, Ch. 17 Freedom of Expression pp. 1051-1052

Freedom of the Press: Jamar, Ch. 18 Freedom of the Press pp. 1061-1078

Reporter’s Privilege: Jamar, Ch. 18 Freedom of the Press  pp. 1061-1065
Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)
Access to Governmental Proceedings–Fair Trial/Free Press: Jamar, Ch. 18 Freedom of the Press  pp. 1065-1073
Richmond Newspapers, Inc., v. Virginia (1980)
Access to Information and Freedom of Press under the ICCPR: Jamar, Ch. 18 Freedom of the Press  pp. 1073-

Tax Treatment of Press: Jamar, Ch. 18 Freedom of the Press pp. 1073-1077
Minneapolis Star Tribune Company v. Commissioner (1983)

Freedom of Association: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association pp. 1079-1102

Freedom of Association, Privacy, and Membership Lists: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association pp. 1079-1083

N.A.A.C.P. v. Alabama ex rel Patterson (1958)

Freedom of Expressive Association and Non-discrimination Laws: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association pp. 1083-1090 
Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984)

Freedom of Expressive Association and Private Clubs: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association pp. 1090-1093

Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000)

Freedom of Expressive Association and the Limited Public Forum Doctrine: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association pp.1093-1101

Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010)

Freedom of Expressive Association and Other Liberties: Jamar, Ch. 19 Freedom of Association p. 1101

Freedom of Religion: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1105-1193

Free Exercise: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1108-1140

Foundations: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1108-1112

Reynolds v. United States (1879)

The Problem of Defining ReligionJamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1112-1115

Laws That Are Neutral and Generally Applicable: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1115-1124

Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (1990) 

Laws Targeting Religious Exercise  Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1124-1133

Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah (1993)

RFRA. Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1133-1137

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014) (note case)

International and Comparative Perspectives  Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1138-1140

Establishment Clause: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1140-1189

The Lemon (1971) Test Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1144-1150

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)

Aid to Schools: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1150-1158

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002)

School Prayer: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1158-1163

Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992)

Religious Speech by or from the Government: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1163-1164

Displays of Religious Symbols on Public PropertyJamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion:  pp. 1164-1179

McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Ky., 545 U.S. 844 (2005)

Teaching Creationism in Public Schools: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1179-1181

Establishment and Freedom of Expression in a Designated Limited Public Forum: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1181-1187

Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (1995)

Coercion, Endorsement, Neutrality, Accommodation, and Separation: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1187-1188

Race, Politics, and Religion: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1188-1189

Social Justice and Freedom of Religion: Jamar, Ch. 20 Freedom of Religion pp. 1189-1191

Final Exam   December 2017