POL S 390 (A1)

The overall goal of this course is to examine courts, judges, the justice system, law, and their relationship to politics in Canada and the United States. One major objective is for you to gain knowledge about how the court systems in the two countries operate, what public policy questions are raised by the current arrangement of the court systems, the distinctive issues related to civil and criminal justice, and similarities and differences in the Canadian and American contexts. A second major objective is for you to be able to think critically about the general relationship between law and politics: how the thing we call "law" contains and communicates political values about power, justice, and equality; how judicial and other legal processes are influenced by elections, legislatures, interest groups, and public opinion; and what the appropriate role is for law versus other political institutions. Prerequisite: POL S 332 (US Politics & Government) or POL S 220 (Canadian National Government & Politics).

You are responsible for attending class on time, completing the reading assignments, and participating in class discussions. Written assignments are:

· 10-12 page (3000-3600 word) crime narrative – due Wednesday, November 29 30%

The midterm and final exams are essay exams covering the lectures, readings, and class discussions. (The final exam covers the material after the midterm.) The purpose of the exams is to evaluate your ability to explain and apply the information and ideas presented in lectures, readings, and discussions. The exams are made up of questions from a list that I provide to you well before the exam, and you will have some choice of questions on the exam.

All three assignments are explained in detail in separate sheets! All are due in class!!

Note: Late papers are penalized two grades for the first day/part day late, then one grade for each day thereafter. The maximum penalty is five grades. I make exceptions to the lateness penalty for documentable, genuine emergencies, which does not include computer problems.

Everything in this course is graded on the U of A letter grade scale, where each letter grade has a numeric value. To calculate your course grade, I use the numeric value of the letter grade (where work of A+ quality will be calculated as 4.3^*).

At the end of the term, I will assign the closest letter grade to your final numeric grade. If your raw – not rounded-up – numeric grade is at least half-way between letter grades you earn the higher letter grade; if your raw numeric grade is less than half-way between letter grades you earn the lower letter grade. (To earn an A+ for the course, your raw numeric grade must be at least 4.15^*).

Example grade calculation for POL S 390

Exam 1 (2 questions) (B/A+) 3.65 x .20 = .73

Position paper (B+) 3.30 x .10 = .33

Other paper (C+) 2.30 x .30 = .69

Journal (A-) 3.70 x .10 = .37

Exam 2 (3 questions) (B+/B-/B) 3.00 x .30 = .90

COURSE GRADE B 3.02

Grade Appeals

The Department of Political Science Grade Appeals Policies and Procedures can be accessed at www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/polisci. If you want to appeal a grade on any assignment or exam that was handed back before the final exam, you must initiate the appeal – with your instructor – prior to the final exam. If your concern is still not resolved, see Dr. Steve Patten, Undergraduate Chair.

Academic Honesty

Familiarize yourself with the sections on academic misconduct in the Code of Student Behavior (Calendar 30.3-6), at www.ualberta.ca/~unisecr/appeals.htm, as well as the Truth*In*Education academic honesty program, at www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/TIE/. Also, be aware that I do not hesitate to pursue academic offenses and that I am extremely good at identifying and documenting them. Please make sure you are always doing your own work, and read the assignment sheet directions regarding citations to the work of other authors. Relevant information is set out in the sheets attached to this course outline.

Information about other useful students services, including the Acadamic Support Centre, Student Counselling Services, and Bursaries and Emergency Funding, is available at www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/studentservices/.

Books and Course Pack

These two books required reading:

· Ian Greene, The Courts (University of British Columbia Press, 2006)

· William Haltom and Michael McCann, Distorting the Law: Politics, Media, and the Litigation Crisis (University of Chicago Press, 2004)

There is also a substantial course pack (CP) that will be available for purchase at the SU Bookstore you don’t need it until after the exam.

Some readings will be in the form of handouts (H) that I distribute to you, and there are online readings indicated below with their URL hyperlinks.

Schedule of Topics, Readings, and Assignments

I. Law and Politics

Introduction

Sept. 6

The role of law

Sept. 8

· P. McCormick, Canada’s Courts, Ch. 1 (H)

· A. Kozinski, “What I ate for breakfast”:

notabug.com/kozinski/breakfast

· K. Makin, “Iacobucci reflects on his own Supreme Court trials” (H)

Court systems

Sept. 11

· The Courts, Introduction, Ch. 1, Ch. 2 (pp. 19, 29-50)

· U.S. court systems (H)

Disputes, disputants, and dispute-processing

Sept. 13

· P. McCormick, Canada’s Courts, pp. 38-44 (H)

· M. Galanter, “Why the ‘Haves’ come out ahead” (H)

· K. Makin, “Barbie isn’t only a doll, court says” (H)

Sept. 15

· The Courts, Ch. 3 (pp. 68-75)

· “Statement of Claim”:

www.cba.org/CBA/News/pdf/statement_legalaid_jun05.pdf

· R. Blackwell, “Judges decry trend of citizens playing lawyer”:

secure.workopolis.com/servlet/Content/qprinter/20060310/LITIGATION10

· A.N. Onymous, “My experience with a do-it-yourself uncontested divorce”:

www.cfcj-fcjc.org/issue_8/CFCJ%20(eng)%20spring%202005-My.pdf

Sept. 18

· Liptak, “County says it’s too poor to defend the poor”:

www.truthinjustice.org/too-poor.htm

· L. Eaton, “New Orleans judge has had enough”:

www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/23/news/orleans.php

· A. Liptak, “Preparing the petitions: It irks the lawyers, but is it lawyering?:

www.is.uwp.edu/academic/criminal.justice/13lawyersbk.html

· D. Whelan, "The Oregon experiment":

www.ejm.lsc.gov/EJMIssue2/oregon/oregon.htm

· E. Kleiman, "LSC’s Hi-Tech Helpers":

www.ejm.lsc.gov/Winter2004/technology.htm

Lawsuits and the litigation crisis

Sept. 20

· Distorting the Law, Intro., Ch. 1 (pp. 1-13, 27-30)

Sept. 22

· Distorting the Law, Chs. 2, 3, 4 (pp. 111-127)

Sept. 25

· Distorting the Law, Ch. 5

Sept. 27

· Distorting the Law, Chs. 6, 7

Sept. 29

· Distorting the Law, Ch. 8

· S. Stolberg, “House passes bill to protect gun industry from lawsuits” (H)

· S. Stolberg, “Senate rejects award limits in malpractice” (H)

· C. Lane, “Justices to rule on punitive damages” (H)

Oct. 2 – NO CLASS; POSITION PAPER DRAFT DUE BY 4 PM

Oct. 4 – NO CLASS

Judicial selection

Oct. 6; POSITION PAPER DUE IN CLASS AT 11:00 AM

· “Justice for Sale” (video – in class)

· D. Goldberg et al., The New Politics of Judicial Elections (pp. 1-33):

www.justiceatstake.org/files/NewPoliticsReport2004.pdf

Oct. 9 – THANKSGIVING

Oct. 11

· The Courts, Ch. 2 (pp. 20-27), Ch. 3 (pp. 51-68)

· J. Ziegel, “Bench patronage appointments” (H)

· K. Makin, “Tories blasted for shortfall of 47 judges” (H)

Oct. 13

· G. Galloway & R. Blackwell, “Top-court nominee faces fire Monday” (H)

· C. Clark, “Nominee says he’s no activist” (H)

· J. Ibbotson, “What’s the verdict? Grilling judges is innocent” (H)

If you can, watch the video of the hearings: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7460285393929800056&q=rothstein

Oct. 16

· P. Russell, “First nations for the first court” (H)

· J. Tibbetts, “Women judges make for happier bench” (H)

· K. Makin, “PM’s pick for bench draws fire” (H)

Oct. 18

· S. Goldman, “The Senate and judicial nominations”:

www.ou.edu/special/albertctr/extensions/spring2004/Goldman.html

· M. Gaynor, “The Judicial Nomination Network won’t let Judge Alito be ‘borked’”:

www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/051212

· R. Neas, “What ‘borking really means’”:

www.savethecourt.org/site/c.mwK0JbNTJrF/b.886561/k.6DB0/What_Borking_Really_Means.htm

· S. Stolberg, “Republicans stoke an old fire: judicial nominations” (H)

If you can, watch/listen to these ads over recent federal judicial nominations:

www.committeeforjustice.org/contents/commercial/

www.savethecourt.org/site/c.mwK0JbNTJrF/b.867163/k.C6BD/TV_Ads.htm

Oct. 20 MID-TERM EXAM

II. Courts, Legislatures, and Rights

Critical perspectives

Oct. 22

· F.L. Morton & Rainer Knopff, The Charter Revolution and the Court Party, “Intro.” (CP)

· N. Seeman, “Taking judicial activism seriously”:

www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=561

Oct. 24

· R. Abella, “The judicial role in a democratic state” (CP)

· B. McLachlin, “Respecting democratic roles” (H)

· J. Tibbets, “Canada’s top court has backed off judicial activism, legal experts claim” (CP)

Oct. 26

· K. Makin, "Rights gone wrong?" (CP)

· T. Tyler, "Romanow fears end of medicare" (CP)

Oct. 29

· N. Lewis, “Black scholars view society with prism of race” (CP)

· C. Aylward, Canadian Critical Race Theory, “Preface” (CP)

Judicial independence

Nov. 1

· The Courts, Ch. 4

· J. Monchuk, “Judges, Alberta recommend salary freeze” :

www.hamiltonspectator.com/national/n0615141A.html

· R. Leishman, “Canada’s judges gluttons at the trough”:

lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Columnists/Leishman_Rory/2006/06/06/1616214.html

· J. Tibbets, “Tories want judges’ raise tied to the cost of living” (CP)

Nov. 3

· reading TBA

Nov. 5

· P. Wallsten, “2 evangelicals want to strip courts’ funds” (CP)

· L. Greenhouse, “Rehnquist resumes his call for judicial independence” (CP)

· “Judges toughens sentence after outcry over lenient ruling” (CP)

· G. Calabresi, “The current, subtle--and not so subtle--rejection of an independent judiciary” (CP)

Inputs and outputs

Nov. 8

· The Courts, Ch. 5

· S. Ishiyama Smithey, “Cooperation and conflict: group activity in R. v. Keegstra”: (CP)

Nov. 10

· C. Sunstein, “Did Brown matter?” (CP)

Nov. 13 REMEMBRANCE DAY

When should a legislature use the notwithstanding clause?

Nov. 15

· J. Hiebert, Wrestling with Rights”(pp. 3-27):

www.irpp.org/choices/archive/vol5no3.pdf

· T. Thanh Ha, “Tobacco ad laws loosened by court” (CP)

· “How should Parliament decide whether to use section 33?” (CP)

III. Communities, Politics, and the Justice System

Measuring crime

Nov. 17

· U.S. Department of Justice, FBI, “Crime in the United States, 2005”:

www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/index.html

· U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Key Crime & Justice Facts”:

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm#Crime

· Statistics Canada, “Crime statistics”:

www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060720/d060720b.htm

· D. Frum, “Did American cause Canada’s crime spree?”:

www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20781

Crime narratives

Nov. 20

· D. Yanich, “Crime creep: urban and suburban crime on local TV news” (CP)

Nov. 22

· J.Q. Wilson and G. Kelling, "Broken windows" (CP)

· City of Calgary, “Community Standards: Bylaw Background”: www.calgary.ca

City Living Residential Resource Programs & Initiatives Community Standards (this is a hyperlink!)

· J. Friesen, “A show of community, not force” (CP)

Nov. 24

· C. Smith, “Racial profiling in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom” (CP)

Juries

Nov. 27

· V. Hans and J. Casper, “Trial by jury, the legitimacy of the courts, and crime control” (CP)

· A. Liptak, "Freed after 44 years, a prison journalist looks back and ahead" (CP)

Nov. 29 – CRIME NARRATIVE DUE IN CLASS

· C. Cosh, “The jury is under attack” (CP)

· R. Blackwell, “Between the spirit and the letter of the law” (CP)

· C. Aylward, “Jury selection cases” (CP)

· C. Lane, "Justices overturn verdict, cite race” (CP)

Sentencing

Dec. 1

· R. Blackwell, “Adult crime, adult time? N.S. case fuels debate” (CP)

· C. Clark, “Crackdown takes aim at guns, sentencing” (CP)

· J. Tibbetts, “Tories ready to roll out law-and-order agenda (CP)

· J. Tibbetts, “Minister won’t rule out jail for pre-teens” (CP)

Dec. 4

· K. Makin, “Conditional sentences win backing of top court” (CP)

· B. Curry, “Saskatchewan fears more natives will be jailed” (CP)

· R. v. B.W.P.; R. v. B.V.N., 2006 SCC 27 (selected paras. TBA):

www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2006/2006scc27.html

Dec. 6 – JOURNALS DUE IN CLASS

· D. Murphy, “Ballot plan to ease ‘3 strikes’ law divides Californians and a victim’s family” (CP)

· C. Lane, “Sentencing standards no longer mandatory” (CP)

FINAL EXAM

Tuesday, December 12

9:00-11:00 AM

Descriptor	Letter grade	Numeric value used in calculating your course grade
Excellent	A+ A A-	4.3 (^On your transcripts, A+ and A both have a grade point value of 4.0.*) 4.0 3.7
Good	B+ B B-	3.3 3.0 2.7
Satisfactory	C+ C C-	2.3 2.0 1.7
Poor	D+	1.3
Minimal Pass	D	1.0
Failure	F	0.0