PLEASE USE CASES ATTACHED
Should Californians be able to require higher welfare standards for farm animals that are raised in other states if products from those animals are to be sold in California?
Pork producers are challenging a law that California voters adopted in 2018 via ballot initiative with over 63% approval. It set new conditions for raising hogs, veal calves and egg-laying chickens, whose meat or eggs are sold in California. The state represents about 15% of the U.S. pork market.
At most commercial hog farms, pregnant sows are kept in “gestation crates” that measure 2 feet by 7 feet – enough room for the animals to sit, stand and lie down, but not enough to turn around. California’s law requires that each sow must have at least 24 square feet of floor space – nearly double the amount that most now get. It does not require farmers to raise free-range pigs, just to provide more square feet when they keep hogs in buildings.
The National Pork Producers Council argues that this requirement imposes heavy compliance costs on farmers across the U.S., since large hog farms may house thousands of sows and that it restricts interstate commerce.
Farmers and animal welfare advocates understand that if California wins, states with the most progressive animal welfare policies – primarily West Coast and Northeast states – will be able to effectively set national standards for the well-being of many agricultural animals, including chickens, dairy and cattle. Conceivably, California might also be able to require basic conditions for human labor, such as minimum wage standards, associated with products sold in California.
Nine other states have already adopted laws requiring pork producers to phase out gestation crates.
How would John Marshall analyze the constitutional issue presented by the California law? Would Marshall probably uphold the law or not?
How would the Cooley standard by applied here? Under that standard, would the law be constitutional or not?
Does this law discriminate against interstate commerce?
What factors would go into modern balancing analysis? Would the law likely be upheld or not?
750 words.
Provide a minimum response of one complete paragraph to each of the following ten questions as appropriate. Detailed examples should be included in all answers.
Resist the temptation to copy material from any source. All must be written in your own words. Plagiarism will not be tolerated.
1. Identify the two U.S. Senators from California by rank and political party. How long have they been Senators? Identify the U.S. Representative representing the Long Beach Area. List his party and legislative district. The Speaker of the California Assembly represents Long Beach. What is his name and political party affiliation?
2.With reference to the U.S. Supreme Court, identify and discuss the “Eight Steps to Judgement” as they perform their role in judicial review. Be as detailed as possible.
3. With reference to the lecture on lawmaking in Congress, outline the process of how a bill becomes law. Then discuss how to get a bill passed. Be as detailed as possible.
4.Why is the President referred to as the “Chief Legislator?” Provide some examples of how Presidents typically perform this role.
5. Presidents enjoy more latitude in foreign affairs than in domestic affairs. With reference to foreign policy, list and briefly explain at least two of the key roles he plays in his role as “Global Leader.” Identify one foreign policy accomplishment of President Joe Biden this year.
6.Executive orders by the President are not an optimal way to hold bureaucratic agencies accountable. Why? Be specific. Consult the discussion in the lecture on bureaucracy.
7.In terms of keeping the bureaucracy accountable to the people, define and discuss the primary functions of congressional oversight discussed in lecture. List at least one example of a committee in Congress and an agency it oversees.
8.Discuss the process of Presidential selection of U.S. Supreme Court appointments. List factors typically considered by Presidents. The current U.S. Supreme Court (Roberts Court) is divided along ideological lines.
9.Discuss the rights of criminal defendants found in the constitution and in the Bill of Rights. Be sure to identify the location of each of these rights in these documents.
10.Discuss the purpose and meaning of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Be sure to address the idea of a “wall of separation” and the purpose and application of the Lemon Test in your answer.
Post a relevant news article, piece of art (music, film, clip from a show, anything is fair game!) and provide an analysis of it using one of the concepts or ideas from the readings for this week. Cite a specific page at least one time, using whatever style you wish. Your analysis should be at least 250 words in length.
Political Liberalism
John RawlsColumbia University Press; Expanded edition (March 24, 2005)ISBN-10 0231130899ISBN-13 9780231130899
study help
NEED HELP STUDYING
I HAVE A TEST TOMORROW IT IS TIMED 10 QUESTIONS EACH ANSWER HAS TO BE 5 SENTENCES BUT HAS TO BE DONE IN 2 HOURS WONT KNOW QUESTIONS TILL TOMORROW
Label each entry as you do them whether it’s the title or numbers.
Take a look at the requirements and example below and what’s attached.
What’s required?
Three learning journal entries per week (described below). At least one journal entry per week must address our semester reading, Our Own Worst Enemy, and other readings related to our special focus this semester: threats to US democracy and ways those threats can be mitigated.
Read the prompt details below and reach out if any questions. You aren’t graded on your political views. You are graded on whether you support your views with credible sources and evidence. Credible sources do not include opinionated commentators like Tucker Carlson or Michael Moore. They can be fun to listen to but are not college assignment sources. So too social media memes and conspiracy theories. I’m not joking. People have cited them. Provide evidence and citations to back up your claims to help others fairly evaluate your arguments. Anyone should be able to go to the materials you relied on upon and see for themselves to confirm, disconfirm or challenge your reading of that material. Then, and only then, can a free and open, and INFORMED discussion take place. No one is limiting your right to free speech by asking you to back up your claims, for additional evidence, or questioning the credibility of your sources.
Avoid logical fallacies
You’ll also find common logical fallacies (aka BS arguments) defined on the second part of this page. Once again, use it as a checklist and make sure you are making the best possible case for your point of view in your journals.
Questions to address for each idea in a learning journal
Once you have your three ideas (plus one optional extra credit idea) for the week answer the following four questions for each idea:
1) What was the one idea that struck you and why?
2) How does it connect to what you are learning about in class?
What does this mean? Step 1: As you read each section introduction and each page keep notes on the main idea- something that can be written in a sentence or a short phrase. Step 2: What is the main idea of both the module and the section on your topic page is located in? Step 3: What is the main idea you are writing or about or addressing in your journal entry? Step 4: Go back to your notes. What are the other main ideas from this section or module? Step 5: What main idea is your topic an example of? How does it compare to the other main idea(s)? How is it the same? How is it different? Your answer to Step 5 is your answer to question 2 on how your journal entry connects to what you learning in class.
3) How did it expand your understanding?
4) What would you like to learn more about?
Here are the journal entries
#1: Institutions, Polarization and Threats to Democracy (see attachment below)
#2: Presidential Power and Its Limits (see attachment below)
#3: Section Introduction Governing Institutions (see attachment below)
