Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question Forum
-
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:01 pm
Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
Does anyone know if there is a big difference between the 3rd and 4th edition of this supplement? was thinking of buying the 3rd edition, but not sure if thats the best idea.
- LetsGoLAW
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:07 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
3rd is fine.SKlei wrote:Does anyone know if there is a big difference between the 3rd and 4th edition of this supplement? was thinking of buying the 3rd edition, but not sure if thats the best idea.
-
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:21 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
3rd is fine. Off the top of my head, you'll only be missing complete info on a couple of habeas cases.
-
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:07 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
I'd imagine you'd miss the Sebellius case, which your class would probably cover, but you could simply get that case off Westlaw or LexisNexis.
- Nelson
- Posts: 2058
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:43 am
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
NFIB v. Sebelius isn't in the 4th edition either since it came out in 2011.waxecstatic wrote:I'd imagine you'd miss the Sebellius case, which your class would probably cover, but you could simply get that case off Westlaw or LexisNexis.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:40 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
This is seriously much better than Chemerinsky:
http://www.amazon.com/Sum-Substance-Aud ... supplement
I know it's sacrilegious to say something like this, but Chemerinsky is way more than you need.
http://www.amazon.com/Sum-Substance-Aud ... supplement
I know it's sacrilegious to say something like this, but Chemerinsky is way more than you need.
-
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 11:09 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
I have both and I know the standing section is different because recent cases have changed the analysis
-
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:21 pm
Re: Chemerinsky Con Law Supplement Question
Agreed to a certain extent-I used these to supplement my outline, but I also used Chemerinsky for the same purpose. You don't need to read Chemerinsky straight through or anything. Instead, just go look up where he discusses the cases and make sure you have the important points he makes in your outline. Also, our Con Law exam was open book, so I tabbed up Chemerinsky and referred to it a couple times during the exam.This is seriously much better than Chemerinsky:
--LinkRemoved-- ... supplement
I know it's sacrilegious to say something like this, but Chemerinsky is way more than you need.