How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:13 pm

Ok, my con law professor is awesome but I have no Idea how he can test the material as he presents it.

First, he presented long and detailed analysis of land mark cases in the early court. We spent three and a half weeks on Maarburry, another week on McCulloch. Second, he started in on the commerce clause and its cases. That's been at least a month. Supposedly, we're moving on to other material after break, next week. HTF can he test such material?

My thought is he might give us a fact pattern on judicial review and another on the commerce clause (and whatever the fuck comes next). How can he possibly test us on the extreme depth he presents in class.

Any insight is much appreciated.

User avatar
Ipsa Dixit
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:56 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby Ipsa Dixit » Tue Mar 16, 2010 10:00 pm

Ask the prof for old exams that you can review.

User avatar
apper123
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby apper123 » Tue Mar 16, 2010 10:56 pm

Haha I was thinking this EXACT same thing today and my prof even makes his old exams with model answers available... and I'm still not sure.

dreman510
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby dreman510 » Tue Mar 16, 2010 10:57 pm

I take comfort knowing im not the only one struggling to grasp how to handle a conlaw test... :roll:

User avatar
Grad_Student
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:20 am

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby Grad_Student » Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:06 am

Our fact pattern involved Due Process and Equal Protection violations.

User avatar
samiseaborn
Posts: 269
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:55 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby samiseaborn » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:43 am

Grad_Student wrote:Our fact pattern involved Due Process and Equal Protection violations.


Same.

And then an open ended question where you could throw all the history stuff, Marbury, Carolene products, Lochner, etc.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby 98234872348 » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:49 am

apper123 wrote:Haha I was thinking this EXACT same thing today and my prof even makes his old exams with model answers available... and I'm still not sure.

+1

I took my first con law practice exam yesterday and I have no clue if my answer provided the type of analysis my professor was looking for.

User avatar
TheBigMediocre
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:53 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby TheBigMediocre » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:54 am

mistergoft wrote:
apper123 wrote:Haha I was thinking this EXACT same thing today and my prof even makes his old exams with model answers available... and I'm still not sure.

+1

I took my first con law practice exam yesterday and I have no clue if my answer provided the type of analysis my professor was looking for.


GUNNER ALERT!

teasing.

rando
Posts: 908
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:57 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby rando » Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:59 am

mikeytwoshoes wrote:Ok, my con law professor is awesome but I have no Idea how he can test the material as he presents it.

First, he presented long and detailed analysis of land mark cases in the early court. We spent three and a half weeks on Maarburry, another week on McCulloch. Second, he started in on the commerce clause and its cases. That's been at least a month. Supposedly, we're moving on to other material after break, next week. HTF can he test such material?

My thought is he might give us a fact pattern on judicial review and another on the commerce clause (and whatever the fuck comes next). How can he possibly test us on the extreme depth he presents in class.

Any insight is much appreciated.


Con law usually starts out very slow and drawn out to give students the depth needed to parse out how and why the system works the way it does. Con law is difficult in that you can't just teach one part of the constitution and move on to the next and have people understand it from scratch. Because so many of the doctrines and branches of government are interrelated it is one of those courses that sort of all comes together at the end. For this reason, professors spend an inordinate amount of time on judicial review, lochner, landmark cases etc. and then move into the doctrines and start to move a lot faster. The second half of the semester should clip along at a faster pace.

Our professor asked us doctrine specific questions...
Equal protection
Due process
Commerce Clause
Separation of Powers (sort of doctrinal)

And within those offered subparts to weave in some of the more historical implications that we spent so much time on at the beginning of the semester

dreman510
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby dreman510 » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:01 am

After 1st semester, I started to feel sure of myself. After outlining and studying Conlaw, that has gone out the window...

Ignatius J. Reilly
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:07 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby Ignatius J. Reilly » Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:06 am

Con Law? Essay, of course.

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:42 pm

Ignatius J. Reilly wrote:Con Law? Essay, of course.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

User avatar
Pizon
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2008 2:53 am

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby Pizon » Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:37 am

Mine was part multiple choice, part hypothetical, and part open-ended thematic essay.

I thought it was going to be a lot harder than it actually was. The pace did pick up at the end of the semester, and it started coming all together.

dreman510
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby dreman510 » Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:29 am

Apparently my prof likes to tie in all of the modalities the Supreme Court uses in deciding cases (originalist, prudential, textual, structural, etc) in evaluating most fact patterns. Anyone have experience with this?

User avatar
Grad_Student
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:20 am

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby Grad_Student » Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:47 pm

dreman510 wrote:Apparently my prof likes to tie in all of the modalities the Supreme Court uses in deciding cases (originalist, prudential, textual, structural, etc) in evaluating most fact patterns. Anyone have experience with this?

lol yes, we spent the first 2 weeks on all the modalities. I know it was worth a few points so nothing to fret over, for me anyway.

tikitavi
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:55 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby tikitavi » Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:31 pm

dreman510 wrote:Apparently my prof likes to tie in all of the modalities the Supreme Court uses in deciding cases (originalist, prudential, textual, structural, etc) in evaluating most fact patterns. Anyone have experience with this?


My prof bases all our class discussions of every case on the modalities and these are the types of arguments he wants on the exam. In the exam instructions he even recommends organizing the answer by the type of argument(i.e. a heading for 'Textual', 'Structural', etc.). I'm a little worried..I still don't really understand what a 'structural' argument is exactly. I'd usually go to a hornbook and be enlightened, but I haven't been able to find anything that really discusses in depth how to go about making these types of modality arguments. Has anyone?

BobSacamano
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 7:51 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby BobSacamano » Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:56 pm

"Structural" refers to the structure of the government, meaning the interplay between branches and their powers and whatnot. I think. At least that's how my professor made it sound.

Funny how we spent maybe 2 hours on the whole structuralist, originalist, textualist, etc. thing. Haven't mentioned it since.

fortissimo
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 11:05 am

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby fortissimo » Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:28 pm

All hypos and essay questions.

I'm surprised you guys spent 3 weeks on Marbury. I think we spent 2 days on it total, but we also covered a lot more material midway through the semester than you guys have so far.

dreman510
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 8:02 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby dreman510 » Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:43 pm

Anyone here use Siegels for practice questions at all? Or anything besides practice tests?

User avatar
apper123
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby apper123 » Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:47 pm

Like many of my exams this semester, my con law exam has strict word limits. Man that's annoying... especially since I'll need to cite cases for the exam.

User avatar
grobbelski
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:50 pm

Re: How did Your Prof. Test Con Law?

Postby grobbelski » Sat Mar 20, 2010 11:46 am

Here is a former conlaw question that our professor gave our class as a review.

"Given Justice X's opinion in Youngstown, do you think he would agree with the court's opinion in Curtiss-Wright? Closely related, how do you think he would rule on the Constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution?

Write no more than 5 pages"


hth




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: btruj777, hairbear7, RareExports and 16 guests