Top Law Schools

So I am in Individual Rights. Fairly interesting I suppose (although pretty irrelevant), and nothing in particular was all that difficult from class to class.

But now that I'm trying to outline and study for the exam, I'm left with a big fat "lol wut?" It has got to be the least organized, least structured class of all time. At least Con Law I could be structured around the various governmental powers we studied, but I don't even know where to begin with this stuff. I am very much a "compartmentalized" thinker, but I'm having trouble organizing the class.

My question, for those of you who have taken it before, is how do I study for this? We used the Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking book from Brest, and the focus was primarily on race, sex, and implied fundamental rights (so a lot of due process, equal protection, and stuff like that) I have an eight-hour take-home exam with a new prof, so it is pretty much impossible to know what she will throw at us.

I know this is a vague question, but if anyone has any insights, please do tell.

The cases you read are presumably structured around certain types of cases, even if the differences are not principled. I would just go with that.

So, you'll want to sort together all the sex discrimination cases, all the race discrimination cases, etc.

Chemerinsky ?

CanadianWolf wrote:Chemerinsky ?

He and I are hanging out right now. He was gold 1L year, he seems equally solid now.

And yeah Ben, that's how I organized my outline. It's just a "shell" right now; I used the headings in the book. But like, I am wondering if I should organize it based around the constitutional clauses instead (due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities, etc.) There are weaknesses to both approaches.

romothesavior wrote:

CanadianWolf wrote:Chemerinsky ?

He and I are hanging out right now. He was gold 1L year, he seems equally solid now.

And yeah Ben, that's how I organized my outline. It's just a "shell" right now; I used the headings in the book. But like, I am wondering if I should organize it based around the constitutional clauses instead (due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities, etc.) There are weaknesses to both approaches.

The way my Con law professor always recommended was to organize by the broader issues / clauses (e.g., substantive due process violation? equal protection?) and fill it out with the various strands where they fit (affirmative action, censorship, etc.) Flowcharts help.

NoleinNY wrote:

romothesavior wrote:

CanadianWolf wrote:Chemerinsky ?

He and I are hanging out right now. He was gold 1L year, he seems equally solid now.

And yeah Ben, that's how I organized my outline. It's just a "shell" right now; I used the headings in the book. But like, I am wondering if I should organize it based around the constitutional clauses instead (due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities, etc.) There are weaknesses to both approaches.

The way my Con law professor always recommended was to organize by the broader issues / clauses (e.g., substantive due process violation? equal protection?) and fill it out with the various strands where they fit (affirmative action, censorship, etc.) Flowcharts help.

I love flowcharts. Good call.

I think my biggest concern is that the course has been kind of a seminar-like structure. Lots of "What do you think?" and "How do you feel?" type stuff. I feel like the exam could be equally vague and open-ended, which is something I'm not really all that good at. We'll see what happens.

romothesavior wrote:

NoleinNY wrote:

romothesavior wrote:

CanadianWolf wrote:Chemerinsky ?

He and I are hanging out right now. He was gold 1L year, he seems equally solid now.

And yeah Ben, that's how I organized my outline. It's just a "shell" right now; I used the headings in the book. But like, I am wondering if I should organize it based around the constitutional clauses instead (due process, equal protection, privileges and immunities, etc.) There are weaknesses to both approaches.

The way my Con law professor always recommended was to organize by the broader issues / clauses (e.g., substantive due process violation? equal protection?) and fill it out with the various strands where they fit (affirmative action, censorship, etc.) Flowcharts help.

I love flowcharts. Good call.

I think my biggest concern is that the course has been kind of a seminar-like structure. Lots of "What do you think?" and "How do you feel?" type stuff. I feel like the exam could be equally vague and open-ended, which is something I'm not really all that good at. We'll see what happens.

My professor actually handed out about 50+ flowcharts to the class to help us understand this stuff, so if you could either find some or make your own, you'll be good. Regardless, good luck, romo.