1L Exam Prep and Motivation Thread Forum

[bartleby]

man i am going to get raped by con law. we covered 300+ cases

[merc280]

1AM, and still studying in an undergrad library. The only one open 24/7. Damn you con law. If anyone knows about/ or enjoys con law I could sure use some help sorting out this material.

Shoot.

okay so the following things are what we basically covered during the semester.

Judicial review
federal legislative power
----CC
----Taxing/Spending-14th Amendment Clause 5
Executive powers
States powers
---Pre emption
--DCC
--P &I
Bill of rights
Substantive due process and procedural DP
EP
FR's
1'st amendment

So I have a general gist of what these things are, except for pre emption. Like all I know about that is a federal law preempts a state law, and if there is no federal law directing the states to do a certain action, then via 10th amendment the power goes to the states. Test is 100 M/C and T/F, and he said he would be tricky and change certain words in the articles and test us over that too, like changing up the 18th section of article 1 sec 8, which is the necessary and proper clause and to know exactly what it says.

[merc280]

also he said we don't need to know course names just to be well versed in the important cases, like gibbons v. ogden..

[dreakol]

also he said we don't need to know course names just to be well versed in the important cases, like gibbons v. ogden..

gibbons is important? man i have a lot to learn.

[merc280]

also he said we don't need to know course names just to be well versed in the important cases, like gibbons v. ogden..

gibbons is important? man i have a lot to learn.

well im pretty sure it was. Since it set the basis for the commerce clause, stating that the state may not legislate in the area of interstate commerce in a way that conflicts with state law.

And also case like exparte quirin, which i guess implied authorization to detain people and try them by military commission.

[Wart]

Can you find the Freer civ pro lectures for free? or do you have to put money down?

[MrPapagiorgio]

also he said we don't need to know course names just to be well versed in the important cases, like gibbons v. ogden..

gibbons is important? man i have a lot to learn.

well im pretty sure it was. Since it set the basis for the commerce clause, stating that the state may not legislate in the area of interstate commerce in a way that conflicts with state law.

And also case like exparte quirin, which i guess implied authorization to detain people and try them by military commission.

God I'm so happy my prof didn't care about the historical backdrop of each part that we learned (be it commerce cause or substantive due process standard of review). He said the last day of the exam that he didn't care about case names or the history of the law, just know the modern rule.

Before you say "oh this is great you're so lucky," remember that he docks a third of a letter grade if you're analysis isn't in proper order and penalizes you heavily for not proofreading. Oh, and he had kicked people out over the semester if he felt their answers to his cold calls showed a lack of sufficient preparation. So yea, give and take.

[crossarmant]

1AM, and still studying in an undergrad library. The only one open 24/7. Damn you con law. If anyone knows about/ or enjoys con law I could sure use some help sorting out this material.

Shoot.

okay so the following things are what we basically covered during the semester.

Judicial review
federal legislative power
----CC
----Taxing/Spending-14th Amendment Clause 5
Executive powers
States powers
---Pre emption
--DCC
--P &I
Bill of rights
Substantive due process and procedural DP
EP
FR's
1'st amendment

So I have a general gist of what these things are, except for pre emption. Like all I know about that is a federal law preempts a state law, and if there is no federal law directing the states to do a certain action, then via 10th amendment the power goes to the states. Test is 100 M/C and T/F, and he said he would be tricky and change certain words in the articles and test us over that too, like changing up the 18th section of article 1 sec 8, which is the necessary and proper clause and to know exactly what it says.

Okay, I'm doing this without my notes here, so here goes; Pre-emption is where a Federal law is in existence and you check to see if the state law impedes that law. If there is not state law, then fed law is automatically pre-empting state law. If there is a state law, you see how much it interferes with the federal law... Actually saying this, basically my understanding of the Pre-emption idea on DCC is, pretty much think of Erie from CivPro. If the state law and fed law can exist and don't really cover the same thing then state law will state, yet if state law interferes or is within a field that's supposed to be exclusively regulated by the federal government then federal pre-empts the state law through the tenets of federalism.

I'm sorry I can't give too much better of an answer, my mind is mush now that exams are over and I realized I forgot all my books and notes back where my school is located.

[LOLyer]

Contracts wouldn't be so bad IF IT WASN'T SO FUCKING BORING!

[tedalbany]

[Civ Pro] So if you interpret a Federal Rule narrowly and say it doesn't apply, you would still say that the way it's been construed in Federal Courts is therefore common law, and you'd do Erie analysis. But if you interpret the rule broadly you'd say it does apply, and you do Hanna analysis in which you check to make sure it's constitutional and doesn't enlarge, modify, ... , a substantial right... right?

This is the Freer approach. But my professor has more of a "Common Law (Forum non conveniens, preclusion, etc)- Track 1, Statute/FRCP - Track 2" approach. Should I still use the Freer approach? I've modified the wording some when I restated Freer to make it more consistent. I think that they can both coexist and the Freer approach is just a way of arguing both sides... Should I do that? Or just stick to my professor's approach and just make a determination at the beginning whether I'm analyzing a statute/FRCP or common law rule?

[merc280]

Contracts wouldn't be so bad IF IT WASN'T SO FUCKING BORING!

I see contracts like intricate ballet. Ballet, where the invisible hand of the law will not let you fall, but make sure that you and everyone you come close to remain happy in how they are, even if one gets less than perfect balanced when the benefit is conferred to the other person.

[yngblkgifted]

Feel like I don't know anything about property. Exam on Monday. fuck my life.

[merc280]

Feel like I don't know anything about property. Exam on Monday. fuck my life.

I feel the same way about constitutional law. Plus the problem with 4hr classes is that one grade on the bottom half of the class could risk me failing out.

[Gecko of Doom]

Feel like I don't know anything about property. Exam on Monday. fuck my life.

+1. Screw marital interests.

[gdane]

Ok. Con law now has me concerned. I just took a look at some of my professor's old exams. Im spotting issues, but barely, and the ones that I do spot I'm not able to go into a deep analysis.

Its closed book so I need to fix all this before Tuesday. Ill do it. I just wish I had answers for his exams. The fucker gave us 15 years worth of exams, but none of them have answers.

Good luck everyone!

[merc280]

Ok. Con law now has me concerned. I just took a look at some of my professor's old exams. Im spotting issues, but barely, and the ones that I do spot I'm not able to go into a deep analysis.

Its closed book so I need to fix all this before Tuesday. Ill do it. I just wish I had answers for his exams. The fucker gave us 15 years worth of exams, but none of them have answers.

Good luck everyone!

Con law exam monday. Closed book. 100 MC. This is going to suck.

[MrPapagiorgio]

Feel like I don't know anything about property. Exam on Monday. fuck my life.

+1. Screw future interests.

FTFM

[SilverE2]

Oh My God. This law review write-on competition package is fucking enormous.

[merc280]

Oh My God. This law review write-on competition package is fucking enormous.

Well here's to hoping other people won't finish it or do it carefully. Its easier to just do it real quick and revise alot of times rather than doing it carefully close to the deadline.

[gdane]

What the hell does "Congruent and Proportional" mean?

What makes a remedy "congruent and proportional?"

I cant find a consistent answer. Thanks!

[ilovesf]

What the hell does "Congruent and Proportional" mean?

What makes a remedy "congruent and proportional?"

I cant find a consistent answer. Thanks!

Ugh. I spent SO much time figuring this out and it wasn't even on my fucking exam. Congruence is determined by how closely related Congress's activities prohibited/remedy is to the constitutional injury. Proportionality is examined by looking at often often the violation of the right occurs and whether there is evidence that its a widespread issue, and then whether Congress's law is proportional to the scale of the problem (we talked about that a lot in Garrett & Florida Prepaid)

[gdane]

So if Congress passes a law giving private citizens the right to sue states for lets say spanking citizens, if Congress did not have evidence that spanking was a widespread problem the legislation would not be proportional?

What would be the Congruence here?

Thank you by the way.

[ilovesf]

So if Congress passes a law giving private citizens the right to sue states for lets say spanking citizens, if Congress did not have evidence that spanking was a widespread problem the legislation would not be proportional?

What would be the Congruence here?

Thank you by the way.

Well the bigger issue there is that that's substantive and not remedial. Congress can only make laws under 5 of 14 under rights already recognized by SCOTUS, they can't create new ones - I believe that is closely related to the congruence factor. But I think that is right on proportion.. at least that's how it's explained in Florida Prepaid.

[gdane]

I still have to make my way to Substantive Due process. I fell asleep in class that day.

Thanks though. Ill keep an eye out for when things are substantive due process violations now.

[dreakol]

I still have to make my way to Substantive Due process. I fell asleep in class that day.

Thanks though. Ill keep an eye out for when things are substantive due process violations now.

there is no such thing as substantive due process

(hugo black)