I'm a senior in high school taking criminal justice 2 so i don't know if i will be much help, you can try doing a case on Infanticide, or on a case in which a baby is born but killed after or during birth.
A case we studied a lot was " Tinker vs. Des Moines" there's a lot of details in it...
Also if the focus is confusing what i did was just read and read and re-read the case and examine every single little detail because it all matters. you have to think outside the box and that's hard sometimes..
i hope i was able to help you, like i said i have no knowledge of how crim.justice works in college . goodluck :)
Hi, I have three essay questions for my constitutional law class that have been stumping me for some time.
1) The Q: Justice Brown concluded in Plessy v. Ferguson that if "the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority...it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that interpretation on it." Was that accurate? How would that assessment be viewed in light of the sociological data advanced in Brown v. Board of Education? Is the inclusion of sociological data a desirable factor for judges to take into consideration? Discuss and explain your answers in detail.
What's stumping me -- Should I try to include the different attitudes towards considering sociological data in general, in deciding matters on the court in 1896 vs. 1954? Or should I maybe just narrowly mention the difference in attitudes towards equality between the races and integration?
2) The Q: How does the Zurcher v. Stanford Daily (1978) case explain how Congress can respond to a Supreme Court ruling and provide greater protections to individual privacy and press freedoms? Discuss and explain your answer in detail and provide and explain examples.
What's stumping me -- Should the "examples" the question asks for be within the Zurcher v. Stanford Daily case and/or the Congressional reaction/the law passed or something else entirely?
And if it was other separate examples, why would it ask specifically about Zurcher v. Stanford?
And more generally, has anyone had to deal with these types of questions where the focus is confusing, and if so, how did you wind up answering the question, and did that way work for you?
3) The Q: The FIRAC (Facts, Issue{s}, Rule of Law, Analysis, and Conclusion) method of legal analysis provides students the ability to lessen the difficulties of the law to a straightforward blueprint. When FIRAC is properly used, it offers an important process that may be used by attorneys and law students to critically analyze and think about legal problems. Do you think that identifying the question(s) is critical to the FIRAC method? What are the reasons for the apparent difficulty that many students have identifying and answering the question(s)? Discuss and explain in detail your answers. Be sure to provide several examples and explain the examples.
What's stumping me -- Anyone know any famous cases that might be difficult to FIRAC?
1 answer
2 answers