Explore BrainMass
Share

Constitutional and Administrative Law

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Week 4 DB 1
1. Review Texas v. Johnson. Assuming you want to sustain the conviction, make the best argument you can for how that can be reconciled with the First Amendment. Of the opinions that would have sustained the conviction, which do you find most persuasive and why?
2. Evaluating Van Orden v. Perry, as a public administrator, in the rule of law, explain to what extent your beliefs should affect your reactions to the various justices' opinions.

Week 4 DB 2
1. As a public administrator over a particular entity, describe when public officials should be allowed to conduct their activities in secret. Provide an example.
2. Evaluating New York Times v. United States, provide an example in which it may be warranted to violate the morality of the freedom of information by publicizing a secret identity to prove a point. Explain how this example warrants the morality violation.

Week 5 DB 1
1. Evaluating Dolan v. City of Tigard, as a public administrator, take a position on whether you agree or disagree with the approach that the U.S. Supreme Court developed. Support your position with examples or evidence.
2. Analyzing Grose v. Sauvegeau, explain with details whether you agree or disagree that Sauvegeau should prevail.

Week 5 DB 2
1. Evaluating Thompson v. Voldah as government takes on more and more functions, explain if it makes sense for the rules to be different for private contractual parties especially when the contract states (as with "duly authorized"). Support your position with examples or evidence.
2. Analyzing Brunoli, Inc. v. Town of Bradford, identify and then describe the remedies that should be available. Explain which you would recommend to be the best remedy for both parties.

Week 6 DB 1
1. Analyze Garcetti v. Ceballos, to determine whether or not the Pickering balancing test is applicable to this case and state why or why not.
2. Many states are facing budget constraints that are shining a light on public employees' pay and benefits, which have led to debates about state employees' collective bargaining rights. From a public administrator perspective, speculate to the short-term and long-term effects if limited collective bargaining is adopted. Hint: Look at all the stakeholders involved.

Week 6 DB 2
1. Examine the Federal Tort Claims Acts (FTCA). Discuss whether these laws reduce the risk to citizens or does it serve a compelling state interest. Analyze Dolan v. United States Postal Service.
2. As a public administrator, discuss which view you find more persuasive - that sovereign immunity should be narrowly or broadly construed. State why with examples or evidence to support your position.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com December 20, 2018, 1:02 pm ad1c9bdddf
https://brainmass.com/business/business-policy-and-implementation/constitutional-administrative-law-621100

Solution Preview

Week 4 DB 1
1. Review Texas v. Johnson. Assuming you want to sustain the conviction, make the best argument you can for how that can be reconciled with the First Amendment. Of the opinions that would have sustained the conviction, which do you find most persuasive and why?

The reason that the conviction should be sustained is because of the fact that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution strictly prevents the government from prohibiting any form of freedom of expression that is banned only because society finds the expression offensive or disagrees with the expression. In this particular case, the state of Texas attempted to ban the freedom of expression of the plaintiff by stifling his ability to engage in expressive conduct that was patently of a political nature and protest. Therefore, the Court ruled that expression that offends or is disagreeable is not able to be prohibited simply because it offends or shocks the conscience. This is why groups such as the KKK are able to speak at protests and engage in their First Amendment rights.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1988/88-155

2. Evaluating Van Orden v. Perry, as a public administrator, in the rule of law, explain to what extent your beliefs should affect your reactions to the various justices' opinions.

The beliefs that a public administrator holds are not applicable in this case according to the Supreme Court in this case as the Court basically ruled that only possessing religious content that may promote a message in accordance with religious doctrine is not sufficed evidence that the message is in violation of the establishment clause. Therefore, the monuments such as the monument in this case don't violate the constitution by simply being on the grounds of a state capital building as historically, the monument has been held in high regard for its historical meaning throughout the nation. Therefore, the justices determined that this was permitted as it was not based upon religious doctrine but based upon historical meaning.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/03-1500

Week 4 DB 2
1. As a public administrator over a particular entity, describe when public officials should be allowed to conduct their activities in secret. Provide an example.

In reference to the ability for public officials to conduct their actions in secret, when national security interests exist, the government has the autonomy to engage in secretive actions. In addition, sensitive internal agency actions, actions that are used for foreign diplomacy that is vital to national defense or security, and other measures that are ...

Solution Summary

Constitutional and Administrative Law is examined.

$2.19