Thursday, December 30, 2010

Thoughts about a course in constitutional criminal procedure

I am meditating about my developing unorthodox course in constitutional criminal procedure.

I want my students to become acquainted with some basic constitutional rules & principles, but I do not want to use much course time to get my students to memorize leading cases and their holdings (which they will probably quickly forget after the examination). So I am thinking about using the bulk of class time to having students make arguments from specific constitutional perspectives about specific problems . Hence, at times I may ask students to play the role of Justice Black, Justice Frankfurter, or Justice Scalia. At other times I may ask students to formulate a constitutional argument not yet clearly ever embraced by any member of the Court.

I think such a course could be fun and instructive. But would it work?

On reflection, I think roles should be assigned a full week before class and the arguments should focus on the issue or issues in the "leading cases" that we will study. Correct? I think I might ask students to outline their arguments in advance in Google Docs that can be shared with every member of the class. Does this sound like a good idea?


The dynamic evidence page

It's here: the law of evidence on Spindle Law. See also this post and this post.

Post a Comment