MBE - how'd you feel? Forum

odoylerulez · Post by **odoylerulez** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:42 pm

Did some googling, I think the answer is no. We missed it.

Edited out some stuff -- I think I'm getting too close to actually discussing the question.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:53 pm

I'm pretty sure that the President as commander in chief can do anything he wants with the military.

somuchbooty · Post by **somuchbooty** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:57 pm

odoylerulez wrote:Did some googling, I think the answer is no. We missed it.

Edited out some stuff -- I think I'm getting too close to actually discussing the question.

I said that it was valid, meaning the President couldn't do it. But yeah, my other inclination was that the president had absolute authority for the military. I'd be shocked if more than 30% got that question right.

Elston Gunn · Post by **Elston Gunn** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:57 pm

Yeah, there were like 3 or 4 different competing powers/issues with that question. Sucked.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:58 pm

I just remembered Freer saying that if it was a commander in chief question, THE PRES ALWAYS WINS lol.

nucky thompson · Post by **nucky thompson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:00 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:I'm pretty sure that the President as commander in chief can do anything he wants with the military.

Because you think employees in the navy do not have consitutional rights? Contracts would have no value if what you're saying we're true because they would be effectively meaningless. Maybe in some kind of emergency situation... Not applicable to this discussion.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:01 pm

edit.

LAW813FL · Post by **LAW813FL** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:03 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:
nucky thompson wrote:
jaysnooginz wrote:I'm pretty sure that the President as commander in chief can do anything he wants with the military.
Because you think employees in the navy do not have consitutional rights? Contracts would have no value if what you're saying we're true because they would be effectively meaningless. Maybe in some kind of emergency situation... Not applicable to this discussion.
Your constitutional rights are somewhat more limited as a member of the military than for the general public. The government has a whole lot more "compelling interests" in controlling members of the military.

Very tough q

nucky thompson · Post by **nucky thompson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:04 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:
nucky thompson wrote:
jaysnooginz wrote:I'm pretty sure that the President as commander in chief can do anything he wants with the military.
Because you think employees in the navy do not have consitutional rights? Contracts would have no value if what you're saying we're true because they would be effectively meaningless. Maybe in some kind of emergency situation... Not applicable to this discussion.
Your constitutional rights are somewhat more limited as a member of the military than for the general public. The government has a whole lot more "compelling interests" in controlling members of the military.

Limited does not mean non existent. And what compelling interest justified the deprivation of due process?

nucky thompson · Post by **nucky thompson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:05 pm

LAW813FL wrote:
jaysnooginz wrote:
nucky thompson wrote:
jaysnooginz wrote:I'm pretty sure that the President as commander in chief can do anything he wants with the military.
Because you think employees in the navy do not have consitutional rights? Contracts would have no value if what you're saying we're true because they would be effectively meaningless. Maybe in some kind of emergency situation... Not applicable to this discussion.
Your constitutional rights are somewhat more limited as a member of the military than for the general public. The government has a whole lot more "compelling interests" in controlling members of the military.
Very tough q

Not substantively. Tough only because people allow intuition to overwhelm legal analysis.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:06 pm

I don't think its justiciable to be honest.

somuchbooty · Post by **somuchbooty** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:07 pm

Well I think the fact that tons of people have different interpretations and can rationally support it makes me think the question is a shitty question that is hopefully trial or tossed.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:08 pm

It was a terrible Q, no doubt about it.

nucky thompson · Post by **nucky thompson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:09 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:I don't think its justiciable to be honest.

On what grounds would the issue be non justiciable?

odoylerulez · Post by **odoylerulez** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:09 pm

Pres could have done a lot of things with the officer, but what he did in the question was unconstitutional -- ran afoul of DP. I'm pretty sure. I found some cases and I'm fairly sure Mr. Thompson above is right. (Unfortunately for the rest of us.)

Sorry for being vague, but I don't want banned.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:11 pm

An explanation would get too close to the question.

LAW813FL · Post by **LAW813FL** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:14 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:An explanation would get too close to the question.

I said invalid dp but it was a tossup could easily see it as experimental. It was my second q of the day so that was not a fun way to start it off

UVAIce · Post by **UVAIce** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:15 pm

Pretty sure it's not DP. Pres can fire senior cabinet officials for whatever reason he wants to. Plus, if I remember right, it's not a question of firing but taking him out of the position that gives him extra pay. I'm fairly certain it's a removal question.

sd5289 · Post by **sd5289** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:15 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:And just to confirm, in my AM exam my first row of answers had like 10-14 D's and it freaked me out . . . .

That was the 3rd row in my AM session. It's confirmed somewhere on here (I think in the Barbri thread) that LOTS of people had a line of D's somewhere on their AM exam.

jaysnooginz · Post by **jaysnooginz** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:16 pm

Edited.

Elston Gunn · Post by **Elston Gunn** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:16 pm

nucky thompson wrote: Not substantively. Tough only because people allow intuition to overwhelm legal analysis.

lol thx dude very good contribution

Elston Gunn · Post by **Elston Gunn** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:18 pm

UVAIce wrote:Pretty sure it's not DP. Pres can fire senior cabinet officials for whatever reason he wants to. Plus, if I remember right, it's not a question of firing but taking him out of the position that gives him extra pay. I'm fairly certain it's a removal question.

Yeah, but what if they are *junior* officials?

nucky thompson · Post by **nucky thompson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:18 pm

jaysnooginz wrote:An explanation would get too close to the question.

There is no explanation as the issue is justiciable and the result would be deprivation of property right without dp, a result likey contrary to the answer your hope is correct

somuchbooty · Post by **somuchbooty** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:22 pm

I'm glad I brought this up b/c this has been funny.

Ideally, someone would be able to post something, like a case or rule that makes it 100% obvious what the right answer is, but I've looked and I don't think it exists. Good, good question.

Bubbles 4 Life · Post by **Bubbles 4 Life** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 3:22 pm

I wonder if anyone was able to get a perfect score, either positive (200/200) or negative (a completed 0/200).

MBE - how'd you feel? Forum

How did the MBE go, compared to your expectation?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Register for access!

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Register now!

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Register now, it's still FREE!

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Re: MBE - how'd you feel?

Seriously? What are you waiting for?