Briefing assignment
You will be responsible for writing briefs for
each
case listed on the syllabus for a given week. Briefs should be 1-1.5 pages (generally ~400-500 words, though length will depend on the complexity of the case), and should demonstrate your understanding of both the specific details of the case as well as the larger constitutional issues at stake. A good brief is an excellent study tool. It forces you to summarize and analyze a complicated case, to isolate the key features, and then to express them in your own words.
TITLE FOR ASSIGNMENT : (CASE) SCHECHTER POULTRY CO. VS. US
RUBRIC FOR ASSIGNMENT :
1. Issue(s)
What is the central
legal
question addressed in this case? That is: what constitutional provision is at stake.
2. Facts of the case
A brief summary of the facts that brought the parties to court. This section can be quite brief. Do not spend more than 3-4 sentences here)
3. Holding
What was the decision of the court?
4. Reasoning
What was the basis for the decision?
How
did the court answer the key question, and what issues were they required to resolve in order to reach their conclusion? How did this decision fit into the existing caselaw (if any) on the subject (i.e. – what precedent did they engage)?
Generally this section should focus on the
majority opinion, but if there are important concurring or dissenting opinions, you should cover those as well.
5. Discussion
(not always necessary)
What are the larger implications of this decision? What political, social, or economic factors may have contributed to the Court’s approach? Is this decision still regarded as good precedent?
EXAMPLE :
Case Brief (2004) : Hamdi v. Rumsfeld
1. Issue
Does the constitution of America grant its citizens, who are held in the United States, as an enemy combatant in the due process, who have the right to challenge the factual basis for their detention in front of an impartial decision maker of the case?
2. Facts of the case
The petitioner was an America citizen who was captured by the government of the United States and designated as enemy combatant. He was put under indefinite confinement at the Guantanamo Bay. The petitioner named was Hamdi who filed a federal writ of habeas corpus and Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal, found that his detention was authorized legally and petitioner was not given opportunity to challenge further his title ‘enemy combatant’. He filed petition against it and Supreme Court granted him certiorari.
3. Holding
Yes, the constitution of America grants their citizens who are held under the designation of enemy combatant, the right to an opportunity to challenge the factual basis for his detention in front of the impartial judge. It is important to note that even during the war; the country holds its values and privileges of their citizens.
This is done to avoid extra burdens on the executive branch. It is necessary to rely on the hearsay to support the enemy combatant designation. In these kinds of cases, it has been presumed that evidence given by the government is true as long as they can be rebutted and have fair opportunity for rebuttal is allowed and stills holds the values of constitution. Both the parties agreed that individual citizens when first captured on the battlefield are not entitled to any constitutional right at that time.
4. Reasoning
It has been noted that if the rights of the citizens are to be suspended during the wartime, it must be done by the legislature, not in the court. Multiple opinions limit the rights of the citizens who held as an enemy combatant by the United States government.
It must be noted that petitioner should be released unless criminal proceedings are brought or Congress suspend the writ of habeas corpus. On the other hand, the executive branch must exercise its constitutional power along with congressional approval and detain the petitioner as an enemy combatant. This comes under federal power and this cannot be challenged in court.
5. Discussion
In these kinds of cases, court attempts to balance the interest of the two competing parties. Courts tries to respect for the separation of power and executive branch to protect the country during war on one end and providing constitutional protection to all the citizens on other end.