KC Johnson

Requirements:

email: kcjohnson9@gmail.com

cell: 207-329-8456

office hours: Zoom, by appointment

Schedule

January 26: Introduction

Synchronous meeting, entire class, at:

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82936219017?pwd=dmoxenZ5aUlaSE1DRm9UZlZKZCtjZz09

Meeting ID: 829 3621 9017
Passcode: 232437

January 31: Colonial Foundations

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #1

• Declaration of Independence (1776)
• PA State Constitution (1776)

February 2: Revolution

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #2

Northwest Ordinance (1786)

Articles of Confederation (1777)

Week of February 7: Adopting the Constitution

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #3

synchronous discussion section #1, on reading below:

• Jack Rakove, “Thinking Like a Constitution,” Journal of the Early Republic (2004).
• US Constitution (as written, 1787)
• Bill of Rights (1789).
• Brutus v.  Federalist, New York ratifying debate, re:
• size of the republic; Brutus No. 1; Federalist No. 10
• judicial power: Brutus No. 11; Federalist No. 78
• military affairs: Brutus No. 8; Federalist No. 8

Week of February 14: Evolution of Constitutionalism

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #4

synchronous discussion section #2, on reading below:

• Arthur Garrison, “The Internal Security Acts of 1798: The Founding Generation and the Judiciary during America’s First National Security Crisis,” Journal of Supreme Court History (2009)
• Stephen Engel, “Before the Countermajoritarian Difficulty: Regime Unity, Loyal Opposition, and Hostilities toward Judicial Authority in Early America,” Studies in American Political Development (2009)
• Sedition Act (1798)
• Virginia Resolution (1798)

• Marbury v. Madison (1803)
• Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819)

February 21: No class session (transition day)

February 23: Battle over Slavery

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #5

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

Week of Feb. 28: Civil War & Reconstruction

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #6

synchronous discussion section #3, on reading below:

• Kurt Lash, “John Bingham and the Second Draft of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Georgetown Law Journal (2011).
• James Simon, “Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney,” Journal of Supreme Court History (2010)

• Crittenden Compromise (1860).
• Emancipation Proclamation (1863)
• Gettysburg Address (1863)

Week of March 7: The Constitution in Transition

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #7

synchronous discussion section #4, on reading below:

• Eric Schepard, “Great Dissenter’s Greatest Dissents: The First Justice Harlan, the ‘Color-Blind’ Constitution and the Meaning of His Dissents in the ‘Insular Cases’ for the War on Terror,” American Journal of Legal History (2006)
• George Lowell, “’As Harmless as an Infant’: Deference, Denial, and Adair v. United States,” Studies in American Political Development (2002).
• Amendments 16-19
• Civil Rights Cases (1883)
• Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Week of March 14: Interwar Era

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #8

synchronous discussion section #5, on reading below:

• James Henretta, “Charles Evans Hughes and the Strange Death of Liberal America,” Law and History Review (2008).
• Kevin McMahon, “Constitutional Vision and Supreme Court Decisions: Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race,” Studies in American Political Development (2002)
• Wickard v. Filburn (1942)

Week of March 21: National Security & Civil Rights

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #9

synchronous discussion section #6, on reading below:

• William Wiecek, “The Legal Foundations of Domestic Anticommunism: The Background of Dennis v. United States,” Supreme Court Review (2001)
• Michael Klarman, “Is the Supreme Court Sometimes Irrelevant? Race and the Southern Criminal Justice System in the 1940s”, Journal of American History (2002)
• Sweatt v. Painter (1950)
• Korematsu v. United States (1944)

Week of March 28: From Warren to Nixon

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #10

synchronous discussion section #7, on reading below:

• Michael Belknap, “God and the Warren Court: For a ‘Wholesome Neutrality’,”Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal (1999)
• Chris Hickman, “Courting the Right: Richard Nixon’s 1968 Campaign against the Warren Court,” Journal of Supreme Court History
• Miranda v. Arizona (1965)
• United States v. Nixon (1974)

April 4: Reagan & the Court

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #11

April 6, 11, 13: spring break

Week of April 18: Political & Cultural Controversies

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #13

synchronous discussion section #9, on reading below:

• Linda Greenhouse and Reva Siegel, “Before (and After) Roe v. Wade,” Yale Law Journal
• Andrew Koppelman, “Romer v. Evans and Invidious Intent,” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal (1997)

• Michael Klarman, “Bush v. Gore Through the Lens of Constitutional  History,” California Law Review (2001)
• Bush v. Gore (2000)

Week of April 25: The Bush & Obama Years

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #14

synchronous discussion section #10, on reading below:

• Rosemary Foot, “Exceptionalism Again: The Bush Administration, the ‘Global War on Terror’ and Human Rights,” 26 Law and History Review (2008).
• John Yoo, Office of Legal Counsel memo, justifying use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” against Guantanamo detainees. (This memo was subsequently repudiated by the OLC.)
• Joseph Fishkin, “The Dignity of the South,” Yale Law Journal
• Tom Goldstein, “We’re Getting Wildly Different Assessments,” Scotusblog
• Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)
• Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)

Week of May 2: The Modern Era (Trump, Biden)

asynchronous lecture snippets via YouTube, quiz #6

synchronous discussion section #3, on reading to be posted:

Week of May 9: Moot courts

Learning objectives for this course include: (1) ability to read and interpret key historical sources, including primary sources, court cases, and congressional debates; (2) ability to determine how important themes in U.S. constitutional history change over time; (3) ability to present key legal arguments orally. Item (1) will occur throughout the course; item (2) will occur in the midterm and final examination; item (3) will occur in the moot court.

The faculty and administration of Brooklyn College support an environment free from cheating and plagiarism. Each student is responsible for being aware of what constitutes cheating and plagiarism and for avoiding both. The complete text of the CUNY Academic Integrity Policy and the Brooklyn College procedure for implementing that policy can be found at this site: http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/policies. If a faculty member suspects a violation of academic integrity and, upon investigation, confirms that violation, or if the student admits the violation, the faculty member MUST report the violation.

In order to receive disability-related academic accommodations students must first be registered with the Center for Student Disability Services. Students who have a documented disability or suspect they may have a disability are invited to set up an appointment with the Director of the Center for Student Disability Services, Ms. Valerie Stewart-Lovell at 718-951-5538. If you have already registered with the Center for Student Disability Services please provide me with the course accommodation form and discuss your specific accommodation with me (which will, of course, be granted).

State law regarding non-attendance because of religious beliefs can be found in the Bulletin