POL/LAW ASSIGNMENT
LAST CHANCE BRIEF (Worth 15%–)
Brief due on Turnitin on Dec. 08/Due Dec. 10 BEFORE midnight.
Limit brief to no more than one page—“less is more”.
Submit brief using “Preferred Form”—as shown in several posted briefs on Blackboard. (For example, of “Preferred Form”, see posted brief of Brown I case or other posted case brief for this course with “Preferred Form” in its title.No Submission of briefs not using “Preferred Form”.Submission of briefs not using “Preferred Form” will NOT receive credit.
Requirements (Rules That You Must Follow) for Writing the Brief:
Statement of Issue and Statement of Holding– must becomplete sentences.
Rationale:Complete sentence is not required; only recommend
DO NOT use quotations from any source.Quotations will incur loss of points. You need to use your own words.Paraphrase any quotes you think important.
Remember to observe rules of good English grammar, syntax, punctuation, diction, etc.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Submit brief using Preferred Form -and only using Preferred Form categories:
Case: Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 572 U.S. 291 (2014) found in Nexis Uni database: brief only Justice Kennedy’sopinionin the case
example
Name:Wisconsin v. Mitchell
Citation:508 U. S. 476 (1993)
Essential Facts:Aggravated battery conviction with penalty enhancement aspect rejected
Issue:Does Defendant’s First Amendment rights preclude application of additional penalty when assault is based in part on victim’s race or ethnic status?
Holding:First Amendment considerations do not preclude application of statute imposing additional penalty in battery case where crime is motivated by victim’s race.
Rationale:
1/ State Supreme Court ruling did not delimit subsequent consideration of operative effect of Defendant’s speech; thus, SCOTUS is left to rule on statute’s operative effect
2/ While speech and thought may be protected, conduct is not; state action against conduct may be reached by a legitimate statute [same as:violent physical assault id not protected by First Amendment]
3/ Previous declarations (speech) may serve as evidence of motive which SCOTUS says rightly considered in determining sentence—as was traditionally done by trial judges
For This or a Similar Paper Click Here To Order Now
