Race, Racism, American Law and Reparations

For Monday, November 30

      1.  There will be five readings posted to the Handout pages for your review by Tuesday November 24.  Four  are excerpts from Professor Alfred Brophy's book, REPARATIONS PRO AND CON.  Of the four, one charts reparations according to Professor Brophy up to the publication of his book in 2006, and one is two pages.  The other two are chapters.  For Monday, please read Chapter 1, review the chart, and read the two page excerpt. 

     2.  Discuss RRAL HYPOTHETICAL 8 (Handout Pages) 

For Tuesday, December 1

      1.   Submit written copies of your general alternative remedies to me by 10:00 a.m. (See  RRAL HYPOTHETICAL 8, page 1)

      2.  Complete RRAL HYPOTHETICAL 8 discussion.

      3.  Discuss your submitted written proposed general alternative remedies.

For Monday, November 16

Miller-El v. Dretke

          Justice Souter –

          All read pages 1-2 up to IIA.

                 Meyer       Pages 2-13 (Column 2,  “The state concedes …..”)

                 Mikhail     Pages 13 (Column 2,  “The state concedes …..”) -20

          Justice Breyer –

                 O’Hara      Pages 20-24

          Justice Thomas –

                 Parks        Pages 24-30 (I and II)

                 Rivera       Pages 30-36 (IIIA)

                 Vits           Pages 36-42 (IIIB)

For Tuesday, November 20 and Thursday, November 22

Ricci v. Stefano --

Please read your Ricci reading assignments carefully.  Some discuss applicable Title VII standards, some discuss case precedent, and some discuss both.  This is the sole opportunity for us to discuss Title VII and Race, Racism, American Law and Title VII.  For that reason, it is critical to prepare assignments carefully and thoroughly.  It is important for placing Ricci and its holding in the context of employment discrimination under Title VII as well.

          All read – Pages 1-9

                 Kennedy –

                        Wells                Pages 9-20

                 Alito –

                        Wetherington   Pages 20-27

                 Ginsberg –

                        Williams           Pages 27-36 to B

                        Worthington    Pages 36B-41

                        Wright             Pages 41-49

P.S.  I will have your drafts ready on Monday morning.

For Monday, November 9 –  The Sean Bell Saga.

          Please review the “Saga” and the “Saga Map”.  A revised version of the “Saga” is on the Course Handout page.

1.       Come to class prepared with questions that the “Saga” leaves unanswered.

2.       Based on the “Saga” and the indictment, should any defendant be found guilty of any charge if the cases went to a jury?

Review the information posted in the Bell Sixth Edition outlines this week.

3.       Do Sean Bell’s parents have a remedy pursuant to 241, 242, 1981, 1982, 1983 or 1985?

4.       Why weren’t all the police officers immune from prosecution as a matter of sovereign immunity?

For Tuesday, November 10 – Death Penalty

For Thursday, November 12 – Jury Selection

1.  Here is a key place for the oral argument to begin.  It's a first question first, and the Supreme Court judges should initiate the first question first with a question.  If the League of Women Voters prevailed in the Indiana Court of Appeals, why is the League before the Indiana Supreme Court? 

2. League answers first question first and then proceeds with its arguments and Indiana Supreme Court Justices asks questions if it has any. (15)

4.  Secretary of State Rokita's attorneys answers the first question first and then make its  arguments and Indiana Supreme Court  Justices asks questions, if any. (15)

  League attorneys have opportunity for rebuttal.  Justices can ask questions and, according to Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure, (At least the Rules for this Hypothetical.) ask attorneys for the Secretary of State to address the same question(s).  (10)

6.  Justices meet and decide the appeal.  At the same time, representatives from the League and State will meet with me to discuss what the decision should be.  (10)

7.  Justices will announce their decision with reasons  and then general class discussion will follow (If time permits.)

Race, Racism and the American Law

Professor Baldwin

For Monday, November 2

RRAL Hypothetical 5 and Voting

The League of Women Voters v. Rokita has been appealed to the Indiana Supreme Court.  
Adamson, Baggett, Bostic, Flowe, Franklin, Frost, James, McHaffey, Meyer and Mikhaila will be acting as the Indiana Supreme Ct. justices.

Appellants for this case:  OHara, Parks, Rivera, Vits, Wells

Appellees for this case:  Wetherington, Williams, Worthington, Wright

Please read the League of Women Voters material posted as handouts on the Course Page:
1.   Rokita-Petition to Transfer
2.  Know Your Indiana Courts Appealing to the Supreme Court.

For Tuesday, November 3

RRAL and Violence Bell 6th Edition  -  Reading Assignments

Adamson --   pp. 229-241  to 5.61

Baggett --   pp. 241-252  to

Bostic --   pp. 253-264  to 5.11

For Thursday, November 5

The Sean Bell Saga (Handout page)

Paulette Van Zant is not here today.  It is likely that she will not be here tomorrow either.  For that reason please submit your Bell's Sixth Edition Voting Outlines to Susan Wilson.  Susan sits in the office in the area just outside the Faculty Mailroom in the Faculty Suite on the third floor.  Thank you. 

Please confirm your receipt of the assignment  by e-mailing me.  Thank you.

For Monday, October 26 -- Race, Racism and Voting Bell (6th Ed.) Reading assignments.  Please submit the outline of your reading assignment to Paulette before 10:00 a.m. on the date you will discuss it with the class.  Review the Class Overview for details about Bell Reading assignment outlines and your outline discussion in class.

O'Hara -- pages 341 - 353

Parks -- pages 354 - 365

Rivera --pages 365 (6.5) - 377

Vits --pages 377 (6.8) - 388

For Tuesday, October 27

Wells -- pages 388(6.1) - 397

Weatherington -- pages 398 - 409

Williams -- pages 409 (6.15) - 423 (top)

For Thursday, October 29

Northwest Austin Municipality District Number One v. Holder  (U.S. Sup. Ct., April 2009)

Worthington -- pages 1 - 9 (Chief Justice Roberts)

Wright -- pages 9 - 18 (Justice Thomas concurring and dissenting

League of Women Voters v. Rokita (Indiana Court of Appeals*, Sept. 2009)

Class --page 1 to IA

Adamson, Baggett, Bostic, Flowe, Franklin, Frost, James, Mehaffey, Meyer and Mikhai, please be prepared to discuss League of Women Voters with me in class. 

*I made a mistake in class.  When discussing League of Women Voters thus far in the semester, I said it was an Indiana Supreme Court decision. 

Monday, November 2 RRAL Hypothetical 5

THE RRAL HYPOTHETICAL IS POSTED ON THE COURSE PAGE

For Monday, October 19, 2009

HYPO --3

To:          Firm Associates

From:     Anthony R. Baldwin, senior partner

Date:      October 15, 2009

As you know we represent the respondents (Brandon Marshall, Investa.co LLC and Community Renewal LLC) in a matter involving Mt. Olive Cemetery.  Our senior partner wants me to meet with you to begin to prepare our defense to these claims and representations. 

Please review our recent Kelo discussion and other relevant outlines from your firm colleagues so that you can come prepared to contribute when we meet at 1:10 p.m. on Monday, October 19. 

See you then. 

P.S.  The Petitioner’s/Plaintiff’s papers are to be found in the RRAL course page.  An article sympathetic to the Petitioner can be found there as well. 

For Tuesday, October 20, 2009

          RRAL and property/foreclosures/sub-prime 

                    See H&R Block files in the RRAL course page.

For Thursday, October 22, 2009

          RRAL Hypothetical foreclosure

Thurs., October 15, 2009

Kelo

All read Marjority opinion (Justice Stevens)

Justice Kennedy – Mehaffey

Justice O’Connor – Meyer

Justice Thomas – Mikhail

Monday, October 12 & Tuesday, October 13

      Bell, Sixth Edition, Reading Assignments 

            Baggett –pages 425—436

            Bostic - pages 436 (7.32) –443, 444—458 (top)

            Flowe - pages 461 (7.9) –470(top)

            Franklin - pages 471 (7.10.5)—472

            Frost - pages 475(7.12)—485 (top)

            James - pages 485(7.14)—496

Thursday, October 15

      Read Kelo v. New London Connecticut

Bell, Sixth Edition

Baggett –pages 425—436

Bostic - pages 436 (7.32) –443, 444—458 (top)

Flowe - pages 461 (7.9) –470(top)

Franklin - pages 471 (7.10.5)—472

Frost - pages 475(7.12)—485 (top)

James - pages 485(7.14)—496

                                                                 Race, Racism and American Law

                                                                            Professor Baldwin

Thank you for your outlines.  All but Mr. Mikhail, Ms. Wright and Mr. Frost should have received instructions for RRAL Hypothetical 2 by an e-mail response that also acknowledges receipt of your outline and research.  Mr. Mchail, I have your written outline and I tried e-mailing the instructions to you without success. 

Mr. Mehaffey, please e-mail Ms. Wright and Mr. Mikhail their judges instructions.  Mr. Bostic, please e-mail Mr. Frost the Respondent's instructions.  Thank you. 

I forgot to mention that there will be no class on Tuesday, October 6.  This is the last class cancellation that I foresee.

For Thursday, October 7, we will begin RRAL and Property assignments from Bell, 6th Edition.  The Thursday assignment will be posted on Monday, October 5.

There will a second set of Property reading assignments for Monday, October 11.  Assignments focusing on current developments is one area of RRAL and Property will follow on Tuesday, October 12, and you will be assigned RRAL Hypothetical 3 to prepare for October 14. 

RRAL and Voting will follow Property.  Like Property, the extent of Bell Reading assignments on Voting will require two class hours to cover before discussing current developments and RRAL Hypothetical 4. Voting will be the last topic requiring two class hours to cover reading in Bell.

I am ill and will miss Monday's class for that reason.  We will discuss Grutter and Gratz on Tuesday, and Fisher, et.al. v University of Texas on Thursday.  RRAL Hypothetical will be our topic next Monday.

Professor Baldwin

                                                            RACE, RACISM AND THE AMERICAN LAW

                                                                            Professor Baldwin

For Monday, September 28

We'll finish the discussion about the LSAT and then we'll discuss Grutter and Gratz starting with the fact of Gratz.  Thereafter, you will share your assigned reading from the cases with the class.   We'll conclude with the holding, and we'll discuss what precedents Grutter and Gratz set, if any.  Think about Grutter and Gratz as precedent for the Seattle and Jefferson Parish School District decisions that we discussed last week.  How do the decisions set the equal protection analysis for voluntary school district efforts to achieve diversity in public school districts?

For Tuesday, September 29

Please come to class prepared to discuss Fischer, et.al. v. University of Texas.  (Thank you, Mr. Mehaffey for the cite.  I'll ask Paulette to put the case on the course page for Monday if she can.)

1.  Know the facts in the case.

2.  What was the holding?

3.  This is the federal district court in the Circuit where Hopwood held that an admissions policy using race as a factor violated the equal protection clause.  What happened here to lead to the court's decision in this case?

4.   What is the case precedent?  Is it Grutter or Gratz?  Is it both? Why?

Distribution of RRAL Hypothetical 2

For Thursday, October 1

Discussion of RRAL Hypothetical 2

For Tuesday, September 22

                There is no class.

For Thursday, September 24.

Outlines are posted for Bell reading assignments.  There is no requirement that you post reading assignment for a case.  Nevertheless, preparation of your assigned reading and your discussion of your assigned reading are part the class participation portion of your grade.

For Thursday, September 24

          We will begin our discussion about Race, Racism and Higher Education

Back Ground

          Adamson  -  Bell pages 137-146

          Grutter v. Bollinger

                                                      Pages

              Class............................... 6-10

              Baggett II......................... 10-12

              Bostic III.......................... 12-19

              Frost (Ginsberg)............... 19-21

              Flowe (Scalia).................. 21-22

              Franklin (Thomas)........... 22-35

              James (Rehnquist)........... 35-40

          Gratz v. Bollinger

                                                      Pages

              Class............................... 6-10

              Mehaffey.......................... 10-18

              Meyer (O’Connor)............ 18-19

              Mikhail (Thomas)............ 19-20

              Rivera (Stevens)............... 20-24

              Weatherington (Souter)... 24-28

              Wells (Ginsberg))............. 28-31

For Thursday, September 17

          Bell, pages 73-83 (Handout Pages)

          O’Hara – pages 105-111 (Bell, 6^th ed.)

          Wright – pages 123-135 (Bell, 6^th ed.)

          RRAL Hypothetical 1 distributed

For Monday, September 21

          RRAL Hypothetical I Class Discussion

For Tuesday, September 8

 Please read:

1.      The Emancipation Proclamation

What is a Proclamation?

Who did the Proclamation apply to?

What weight does a Proclamation have as a matter of law?

2.      U. S. Constitution 13^th, 14^th and 15^th Amendments – Be prepared to discuss the scope of each amendment.

What does a constitutional amendment do?

How did each amendment affect slaves on its face?

Did the amendments apply to slaves exclusively on their face?

            3.   Bell, pages 37 -- 39 (See Course Page for text)

            4.   The Civil Rights Cases (See Course Page for the text)

In class, I stated that I would assign reading the Civil Rights Cases and Plessy to students who did not receive Dred Scott v. Sandford assignments.  Both decisions, especially the Civil Rights Cases, are in my view important linchpins for framing our dialogues for the rest of the semester.  For that reason, I would ask all to read the Civil Rights Cases for Tuesday.  The Civil Rights Cases will occupy most of our Tuesday class time.

a.      What did the Supreme Court review in the Civil Rights Cases, a statute or the Constitution?

b.      Be prepared to articulate the Court’s 14^th amendment analysis?

c.       Be prepared to articulate the Court’s 13^th amendment analysis?

d.      Is there anything to be made from the order of amendment analysis?

For Thursday, September 10

We’ll conclude our Civil Rights Cases discussion.  Be prepared to discuss Justice Harlan’s dissent and:

1. his understanding of the historical context for the 13^th and 14^th Amendments,

2. their meaning

3. the meaning of the statute.

4. his perception about where the Justice Bradley majority opinion goes awry.

Please read Plessy v. Ferguson (See Course Page for text)

1.      Be prepared to discuss the course of events that gave rise to Plessy’s constitutional challenge to the Louisiana statute.

2.      Is the Louisiana statute consistent with the Civil Rights Cases holding? Why or Why not?

3.      What is the Plessy holding?  What is the rationale?

4.      What is the purpose of the opinion assessment of what it takes to be “colored”?

5.      How does Harlan see the application of the 14^th Amendment differently in his dissent? Why?

For Monday, August 31 –

For Thursday
The Other Colonies –

We will compare and discuss other colonies with Georgia.  Your colony assignment is below.  You can download your assigned colony off the Course Page, or you can retrieve a copy from the Handout Area.  Bring a hard copy of your colony and be prepared to discuss:

1.   How and why was the colony created?  Was it by charter from the Privy Council?

2.   What was the structure of the government? 

3.   How did the colony’s approach and attitude toward slavery evolve? 

4.   What role did religion play in the colony’s attitude toward slavery, if any?

5.   Come to class prepared to discuss the ability of African slaves and descendants of African slaves in the eighteenth century colony to:  

a.   Own property

b.   Seek remedies for personal injury (torts or trespass on the case)

c.   Seek remedies or redress for the perpetration of common law crimes on them.

d.   Enter into contracts

e.   Seek manumission.

For Monday, August 24

Please read about the colony of Georgia.  There are hard copies for you in the handout area, and the reading is posted on your course page. If you prepare from the course page, please be certain to have it available on your laptop for class.

Be prepared to discuss the following questions:

1. Why did Georgia become a colony?

2. What was the governance structure?

3. What was the Georgia Anti-Slave Law?

4. Be prepared to discuss the amendments after 1735?

5. Be prepared to discuss Georgia law as applied to slaves after 1735.