This is an introductory course on constitutional law. Among other topics, it covers judicial review, separation of powers, federalism, and equal protection. It examines how these concepts have been filtered through politics and institutional constraints during transformative eras of American history, such as the Founding, the Civil War, the New Deal, and the Civil Rights Movement. Individual rights and, in particular, the Bill of Rights will not be the focus of this course. However, the course will examine individual rights in the context of federal and state power, especially as structured by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Copied from a comment over at the Fall 2008 Course thread:
I'm currently in Prof. L*u's Con Law class, and can tell you that it is fantastic. The lectures are complex, nuanced and interesting, and you'll certainly learn a lot. That said, I've heard nothing but rave reviews for Prof. Y*o's class, too, provided you can handle all that "buzz" that surrounds him and can disagree with a professor on some things in productive ways.
Here is, briefly, what was covered in L*u's syllabus this semester:
Judicial Review:
1. Interpretive authority: judicial review, judicial supremacy, judicial sovereignty
2. Checks on the Supreme Court's interpretive authority
Congressional Power and Federalism-Based Limits:
1. Politics versus law
2. Commerce Clause
3. Spending Clause
4. Federal regulation of the states
Equality and the Constitution:
1. Race (part I)
2. Equal protection methodology
3. Race (part II)
4. Gender
5. Sexual orientation
6. Congress and civil rights enforcement
Substantive Due Process
1. Economic liberty
2. Privacy and personhood
I was impressed. This professor was articulate, engaging, thoughtful, and everything I would want in a law school professor.
The presentation, despite not relying on outlines or powerpoint slides, was impressively clear and well-organized. The focus of the course was balanced between doctrinal and policy questions and stimulated student thought and interest.
The instructor was respectful of student thoughts and questions. He did a terrific job of steering comments in down a meaningful and useful path.
While the readings tended to be a bit shorter, the depth of understanding that was expected of us made up for it. In fact, I'd prefer a class where we read less and in greater depth than a class where we read a lot superficially.
Given rumblings that this professor may be on his way out either for government work or to another school, I hope he decides to stay here at Boalt, er, Berkeley Law!
Post a Comment