An Astute Jury

A story about an observant jury:

Guest Blogger: Henry Lowenstein - Gibbons v Ogden: Steamships, Slaves and Supremacy

Henry Lowenstein from Coastal Carolina University shares the following:

Every term I assign 4 cases for my Legal Environment of Business class for students to read the majority opinion and write a 2 page mini-brief summary.  The first one is usually a Commerce Clause case since we start the course on foundations of the law.   This year I decided to use the old war horse, Gibbons v. Ogden.

In perusing the internet I found this wonderful YouTube video which is a 35 minute dramatization of the case done by the Judicial Conference of the United States in 1977.  (The late actor E.G. Marshall introduces it).  It can be a little dry at times but I sent it to my students.

The students who took the time to watch it say they were fascinated, particularly my African-American students who had no idea of the critical linkage between the Marshall Court making this decision and the post hysteria and unconstitutional law enactments here in South Carolina following the Denmark Vesey Slave Conspiracy at that time.  Below is what I sent my students:

Dear Students:

I have heard from some of you working your way through the Supreme Court decision in the case of Gibbons v. Ogden, your first case assignment coming up shortly.

For those of you interested I draw your attention to an outstanding 35 minutes dramatization of this case on YouTube at the following site:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGTkRP4v8tM

This program, commissioned by the Judicial Conference of the United States in 1977, covers the issues and deliberations Chief Justice John Marshall and the then 7 member justices faced and how they ultimately crafted the unanimous decision you are reading.   Note as you watch it, the similarity between the issues and concerns then with what you hear in today's public debate on the role of the Federal government and its regulation of commerce.

What you may find more fascinating, is that the Court took this case as a legal linkage in dealing with events of the time happening in Charleston, South Carolina; the Denmark Vesey Slave Revolt Conspiracy of 1822 and its aftermath. That event led to a cruel and inflexible state law governing seamen passed by South Carolina which many felt impeded commerce.  One of the Justices, sitting as presiding Federal Judge over the region declared the South Carolina law unconstitutional. This helped push Chief Justice Marshall and the full Supreme Court to strongly affirm Federal supremacy over interstate commerce in Gibbons v. Ogden to deal with both situations.

I hope you will find this helpful, interesting and the acting superb.

Henry Lowenstein, PhD
Professor of Management and Law 

Law Music Video - Call The Police

This week's installment in the "Law Music Videos" series is Call The Police by Nat King Cole.  This is a Classic! Law music videos played before your class starts will positively contribute to learning.

This land is Your Land: Judicial Interpretation Illustrated #2

In an earlier post, I advanced the position that the process and results of judicial interpretation can be illustrated by making analogy to the process of music interpretation. Popular music can be a particularly effective device to illustrate complex legal principles. Since students already know and understand popular music and how it works, making proper analogy between what is well understood and what needs to be learned promotes understanding.

Below are six videos of the song, This Land is Your Land, beginning with a version by author/composer/performer, Woody Guthrie. If Guthrie's version is "the law," then what happens when the law is interpreted by other judges.  The song maintains certain consistency of melody and lyrics, but problematic verses are removed and tempo, arrangement and overall effect vary significantly.

This progression of videos may also be used to illustrate, more specifically, the topic of statutory interpretation along the lines as described in this earlier post.
.






Click on the image below to view the energetic performance of the Fabulous Echoes:

The Right to Keep and Bear Cellphones

Many times since the Supreme Court’s decision in DC v. Heller, I have found myself mulling over the ramifications of the following quote:

If, as they believe, the Second Amendment right is no more than the right to keep and use weapons as a member of an organized militia, it does not assure the existence of a “citizens’ militia” as a safeguard against tyranny.

- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

Although the quote applies directly to the constitutional language referring to the right to “keep and bear arms,” what are the broader implications? Is there a citizen’s right to other means of safeguarding against tyranny?  For instance, this article documents the governmental practice of prosecuting persons who use their cell phones to videotape police officers publicly performing their duties. In some instances, the language of statutes designed to combat wiretapping or voyeurism is tortured to the extreme to support a prosecution. If the right to bear arms is a personal right in order to guard against tyranny, then can it not also be argued that there is a right to record allegedly tyrannical conduct for the same purpose? When a citizen is faced with conduct from a government official that the citizen believes is dangerously tyrannical, which response contributes more effectively to an orderly society; the citizen organizing a militia to start a revolution, or the citizen recording the allegedly wrongful conduct on her cell phone for later use in legal proceedings or for media scrutiny?

Inescapable Logic and a "Fair Cop"

A trial, medieval style.  In what ways has the trial process changed since then? 

Note the inescapable logic leading up to the determination of guilt. The accused ultimately admits it was a "fair cop."

Counteroffer: From My Cousin Vinny

Rarely is real life contract negotiation as stilted and mechanical as a formal offer, rejection, counterofffer, acceptance, etc.. Students have to sift through the way people actually communicate to identify the language, conduct, or other expressions of intent that make up the necessary elements of mutual assent for contract formation.  The following clip from the movie My Cousin Vinny includes a comical "contract" negotiation including, as Vinnie points out, a counteroffer.

Click on the image below to go to the video site:


Another option: