You are a newly elected Member of Congress. It is up to you as to whether you are a Senator or a Representative from your State. You made several important promises during your campaign and now that you have taken your seat, you need to show the constituents you represent that you are going to fulfill at least one of these promises with a bill you write and introduce into your chamber. Directions:

/0 Comments/in /by

You are a newly elected Member of Congress. It is up to you as to whether you are a Senator or a Representative from your State. You made several important promises during your campaign and now that you have taken your seat, you need to show the constituents you represent that you are going to fulfill at least one of these promises with a bill you write and introduce into your chamber.

Directions:

Choose a topic for your bill:
Envision the constituents that elected you
Imagine that you have interacted with your constituents
What’s making news?
Look to other states
Look to your own experience
Look at current logs and regulations
Use the internet
Research your bill topic:
Look at existing law
Explore various solutions to the issue
Support your position with facts and figures
Determine your support and opposition

Is there precedence for using social media in libel cases? Which of the four privacy torts are involved with regard to this case? Is this a case of libel?

/0 Comments/in /by

Is there precedence for using social media in libel cases?
Which of the four privacy torts are involved with regard to this case? Is this a case of libel?
Does the expectation of privacy apply to the facts in the case?
Discuss the defenses to the tort of libel and the privacy torts regarding Steve’s lawsuit.
Is there a legal difference in disclosing personal indiscretions to church elders, to members of the church, or to members of the public?

Case study

Steve recently joined a church. Church doctrine required that members reveal any personal indiscretions to the leaders of the church. Steve disclosed some of his personal indiscretions to the leaders of the church. After his disclosures, these leaders informed Steve that they intended to tell other members of the church about his indiscretions because they thought the church leaders might help him overcome his problems. Steve was dismayed that this personal information might be disclosed. He told the church leaders about his intention to leave the church rather than have his problems disclosed. The church leaders informed him that their next step was to tell the members of the church, his neighbors, and his employer about his problems by using social media, including posting his information on Facebook, Twitter, and the church’s online chatroom.This case study is an example of the balance between First Amendment rights and freedom of religion.

As discussed in the module, state judges are usually either selected through appointment or popularly elected. Which of these systems seems preferable to you, and why?

/0 Comments/in /by

As discussed in the module, state judges are usually either selected through appointment or popularly elected. Which of these systems seems preferable to you, and why?

If a plural executive system were instituted at the federal level, would this be an improvement over the existing singular executive system?

/0 Comments/in /by

If a plural executive system were instituted at the federal level, would this be an improvement over the existing singular executive system? How might national-level politics work differently under such a system?

As the Texas Supreme Court opinion indicates, the common law denied humans the ability to recover for the death of another. It was only in the 20th century, when states enacted statutes allowing for spouses and estates to recover for the “wrongful death” – committed negligently, recklessly, or intentionally – of another, that civil lawsuits for the death of another were allowed. What is the reasoning supporting the court’s decision in Strickland?

/0 Comments/in /by

As the Texas Supreme Court opinion indicates, the common law denied humans the ability to recover for the death of another. It was only in the 20th century, when states enacted statutes allowing for spouses and estates to recover for the “wrongful death” – committed negligently, recklessly, or intentionally – of another, that civil lawsuits for the death of another were allowed.
What is the reasoning supporting the court’s decision in Strickland? Be specific about identifying reasons.

2) What are the interest groups that played a role in this case, and what were the groups’ concerns?

1) What are the key elements of ownership regarding animals?

/0 Comments/in /by

1) What are the key elements of ownership regarding animals?

2) Is an owner free to do anything they wish with an animal?

3) Are there any ethical concerns with transferring ownership of animal? Does the type of animal matter?