INSTUCTOR MANUAL FOR n n
Law for Business 15e Barnes
n n n n
Chapter 1-47 n
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING
n n n n n
LECTUREnOUTLINE
1. DiscussnthenTwisdalencasenthatnopensnthisnchapter.nItnprovidesnanninterestingnvehiclenfornd
iscussingnthenfunctionsnofnlawnandnlegalninterpretation.
a. Havenyournstudentsnidentifynthenvariousnfunctionsnofnthenlawnandnthenndiscussnwhichnspec
ificnfunctionsnarenfurtherednbynthisnantiretaliationnaspectsnofnthenCivilnRightsnstatute.
b. Innthencontextnofnlegalninterpretation,nthencourtnfoundnthatnTwisdalendidnseemntonbenprotect
ednbasednonnthenliteralnlanguagenofnthenstatute.nHowever,nitnlookednbeyondnthenplainnmeani
ngntonrejectnhisnclaim.nSpecifically,nthencourtnbelievednthatninterpretingnthenlawninnanmanne
rnthatnwouldnprotectnhimnfromnretaliationnwouldnunderminenthenpurposenofnthenstatute.n Itnisn
conceivablenthatnthencourtnisnmotivatednbynpublicnpolicynconcernsnasnwell.
c. Whatndonyournstudentsnthinknofncourtsnwhondonlooknatnintentnandnpublicnpolicy?nUsenthisna
snanlead-innfornandiscussionnofnlegalnjurisprudence.
2. Questionnstudentsnaboutntheirndefinitionsnofn―law.‖nMakencertainntheynunderstandntheni
mportancenofnlawninnallnaspectsnofnournlives.
3. Discussnthenvariousnfunctionsnthatnlawnservesninnsociety.nYounmightndonthisnbynhavingnthenst
udentsnidentifynsomenofnthem.
a. Discussnthenconflictsnthatnarisenbetweennandnamongnthenvariousnfunctionsnofnlaw.nFornexam
ple,ntherenoftennarenconflictsnbetweennthengoalsnofnindividualnfreedomnandnachievingnsocialn
justice.nNotenthenproblemsnthatnarisenwhenntherenisnnonclearnconsensusnonnwhatnisnjust.
b. Asknthenstudentsnifntheynthinknthatnlawnevernisn―overused.‖nTheynarenlikelyntoncitennumerou
snexamples.nForninstance,nthisnmightnbenantimentontalknaboutnthenproductnliabilityncasesnthatn
arenregularlyninnthenheadlines.nPerhapsnthencaseninvolvingnthenwomannwhonburnednherselfn
withncoffeenfromnMcDonald’snwouldnbenappropriatenhere.
1-1
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
, c. Haventhenstudentsndiscussnwhatnitnmeansntonhaventhenlawnmaintainnorder.nYounmightnasknst
udentsnifnmaintainingnordernmeansnmaintainingnthenstatusnquo.nThisncannleadntonandiscussi
onnofnlegalnrealismnandnviewsnthatnlawnisnusednbynthoseninnpowerntonretainntheirnpower.
4. Therenisnantendencynfornpeoplentonthinknofnlawnasnimposingndutiesnwithoutnconsideringnhownitne
stablishesnandnpreservesnrights.nTalknaboutnhownournsystemntriesntonmatchnrightsnwithncorrespo
ndingnduties.
a. Explainnhownduties,nrights,nandnprivilegesnmakenupnsubstantivenlaw.
b. Explainnthatnproceduralnlawnprovidesnthenframeworknwithinnwhichnsubstantivenlawsnarenc
reatednandnenforced.nPointnoutnthatnChaptersn2nandn4noffernanmorendetailedndiscussionnofnpr
oceduralnlaw.
5. Asknthenstudentsntonthinknofnannexamplenofnandutynimposednbynsubstantivenlawnthatnmightnviola
tensomenmoralnornethicalnbelief.nThisnmightnbenangoodntimentontalknaboutnthenvariousnschoolsnofn
legalnjurisprudence.nHaventhemnspeculatenhownanlegalnpositivistnwouldndiffernfromnanlegalnsoci
ologistnornnaturalnlawntheoristninnhandlingnsuchnsituations.
6. Contrastncriminalnlawnwithncivilnlaw.
a. Pointnoutnthatnsocietynconsidersnitnmuchnworsentonbenconvictednofnancrimenthanntonbenheldnci
villynliable.nExplainnhow,nasnanresult,ntherenarenmorenexactingnproceduralnsafeguardsntonpro
tectnandefendantninnancriminalntrialnthanninnancivilntrial.
b. Notenthendifferencenbetweenncompensatoryndamagesnandnpunitivendamages.nDiscussnthenc
urrentnuproarnovernpunitivendamagesnandnthenSupremenCourt’snattemptntonreinnthemnin.nSe
enStatenFarmnMutualnAutomobilenInsurancenv.nCampbell,n123nS.Ct.n1513n(U.S.nSup.nCt.n
2003)n(establishingnguidepostsnforncalculatingnpunitivendamages).nPunitivendamagesnaren
discussednfurtherninnChaptern6.
c. Pointnoutnthatnoftennonencannbensubjectntonsanctionsnundernbothncriminalnandncivilnlawsn
withoutnviolatingnthenproscriptionnagainstn―doublenjeopardy.‖nFindnoutnifnthenstudentsnth
inknthatnpunitivendamagesninnancivilntrial,ncouplednwithnfinesninnancriminalntrial,nconstitu
tenantypenofndoublenjeopardy.
Marinellonv.nUnitednStates
MarinellonwasnchargednwithnthencrimenofncorruptlynimpedingnthenduenadministrationnofnthenTaxnC
odenafternhenengagedninnseveralnactivitiesnthatnunderreportednhisntaxablenincome.nHowever,nthe
U.S.nSupremenCourtnoverturnednhisncriminalnconvictionnbecausenMarinellonwasnunawarenthatnhen
wasnundern IRSninvestigationnatnthentimenofnhisnactivities.nCitingnthenneedntonconstruencriminal
1-2
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
,statutesnnarrowly,nthenCourtnrulednthatnthenparticularnstatute—thenOmnibusnClause—
didnnotncovernallnactivitiesnthatnunderreportednincome.nThenCourtnbelievednthatnthenstatutencoverednan
narrowernrangenofnactivitiesnaimedndirectlynatnthwartingnthenactivitiesnofninvestigationsnwhennthenta
xpayernknewnornshouldnhavenknownnanninvestigationnwasnunderway.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nThisncasenisnplacedninnthentextnasnannexamplenofnthengeneralnrulesnunderlyi
ngncriminalnlaw.nSpecifically,nanpersonngenerallyncannotnbenconvictednofnancrimenunlessnhenornshen
violatesnanstatute.nHowever,nsuchnstatutesnmustnbenobjectivelynclearntonanreasonablenperson.nThisn
Government’sninterpretationnofnthisnstatutenwasnbelievedntongrantnthenGovernmentntoonmuchndisc
retionninndeterminingnwhatnconstitutednancrime.
7. Thenbriefnintroductionntonournlegalnsystemnshouldnbenanreviewnfornmostnstudents.
a. ThenconstitutionalnlawnmaterialnisnmorenheavilyndiscussedninnChaptern4.nAnnargumentncannb
enmadenfornitntonbenpresentednimmediatelynfollowingnthisnchapter.nHowever,nwenbelievenstu
dentsnshouldnfirstnreviewnChaptern2’sndiscussionnofnthendisputenresolutionnsystem.
b. Talknaboutnthenrolenofnthencourtsninndeterminingnthenconstitutionalitynofnlegislation.nDont
heynbelieventhisngivesnthencourtsntoonmuchnpower?
c. Explainnthenrelationshipnbetweennstatenlawsnandnfederalnlaws.nMakencertainnthenstudentsnun
derstandnthatnstatenlawsnmaynnotnviolatenthenfederalnconstitutionnandnmustnbenconsistentnwit
hnfederalnstatutes.
HenrynScheinnv.nArchern&nWhitenSales
ThenFederalnArbitrationnActnprovidesnthatnpartiesnmay,nthroughntheirnpowerntoncontract,nagreenthatnt
heirndisputesnwillnbenarbitrated.nInnaddition,nthenActnallowsnthosensamenpartiesntonagreenthatnannarbit
rator,nrathernthannancourt,nwillndeterminenwhethernthatnarbitrationnclausenappliesntonanynparticularndi
sputentheynmaynhave.nHowever,nseveralnfederalnappellatencourtsncarvednoutnan―whollyngroundless‖ne
xceptionntonthenlatternrulenbynwhichntheynallowedncourtsntonconcludenthatnarbitrationnwasnnotnappro
priatenwhennthencourtnbelievednthenclaimnofnarbitrabilitynwasngroundless.nInnthisncase,nthenU.S.nSupr
emenCourt,ncitingnbothnthenstatutenandnSupremenCourtnprecedent,nrulednthatnthe
―whollyngroundless‖nexceptionnwasnimpermissiblenbecausenitncontradictednthenstatute.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nThisncasenisnannexamplenofnthenlimitsnonnthenjudiciary’sndiscretionnundernt
hencommonnlaw.nItnillustratesnthatninnthenhierarchynofnlaws,nlegislativenlawnisnsuperiorntonjudge-
nmadenlaw.n Itnalsonillustratesnthenrolenofnprecedentninninterpretingnstatutes.
8. Thenmaterialnonnstatutoryninterpretationncannbenextremelynimportantninnlayingnthenfoundationnf
ornhownlawyersnthink.nMorenimportantly,nitnteachesnstudentsnvaluablencriticalnthinkingnskills.nT
akenthenstudentsnthroughnthenprocessnforninterpretingnstatutes.nYounmayndiscussnstatutoryninter
pretationnandnlegalnjurisprudencentogether.nNotenhownpositivistsnoftennhavenproblems
1-3
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
, movingnbeyondnthen―plainnmeaning‖nofnwordsnwhilennaturalnlawntheoristsnandnlegalns
ociologistsnarenaccusednofnignoringnthem.
Bostocknv.nClaytonnCounty,nGeorgia
EmployersnarguednthatnCivilnRightsnAct’snprohibitionnagainstndiscriminationnbasednonnsexndidnnotnp
rotectnemployeesnwhonwerenfirednbecausentheynwerenhomosexualnorntransgender.nThenemployersnas
sertednthatnthenlawnshouldnnotnbenexpandedntonprotectnthesenemployeesnbecausenthenlegislatorsnwhon
originallynenactednthenstatutenwouldnnotnhavenenvisionednitnbeingnextendedninnthisnway.nThe
U.S.nSupremenCourtndisagreed.nItnfoundnnonambiguityninnthenplainnmeaningnofnthenstatute—
thenCourtnbelievednthenstatutorynlanguagenclearlynprohibitednsuchndiscriminationnbecausenitnwasnbas
ednonnsex.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nExplainnhownthencourtnrefusedntonlooknbeyondnthenplainnmeaningnofnthensta
tute,nconcludingnthatnitnwouldnbenwrongntonattemptntongleannthenintentnofneachnlegislatornwhonvote
dnfornthenlaw.nDiscussnwhethernthisnopinionnisntrulynlegalnpositivistninnnature.nExplorenhownitnmight
nhavenundertonesnofnlegalnsociology.
9. Discussnthenconceptnofnstarendecisis.
a. Notenhownstarendecisisnpromotesnstability.
Stewartnv.nJustice
Restaurantnownersnaskednthencourtntonenjoinnenforcementnofnannexecutivenordernrequiringnrestaur
antnemployeesnandncustomersntonwearnmasks.nThencourtnupheldnthenMasknMandate,nreasoningnth
atnitnwasnreasonablyndesignedntonprotectnthenhealthnofnthenpublicnfromnthenspreadnofnthenCOVIDnvi
rus.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nUsenthisncasentonexplainnthenprocessnofnstarendecisis.nNotenhownthencourt,nin
nthenabsencenofnclearnprecedentndealingnwithnCOVIDnrestrictions,nlookednfornguidancentonansmallp
oxncasendecidednbynthenU.S.nSupremenCourtnmorenthann100nyearsnago.nYounmightnalsonusenthisncase
ntondiscussnexecutivenordersnandntheirnplaceninnthenhierarchynofnlegalnrules.nExplainnhownexecutiven
ordersnmaynnotnviolatenconstitutionalnprotections.nThisncasenisnalsonconnectedntonChaptern4nandnitsn
discussionnofnduenprocess.
a. Notenhownstarendecisisnpermitsnchange.
b. Explainnhownthenrulenagainstnexnpostnfactonlawsndoesnnotnapplyntoninstancesnwherenthenc
ourtnhasnreinterpretednanstatute.nDiscussnhownthisncannposenproblemsnfornpeoplenwhonrel
iednonnthenoriginalninterpretation.
1-4
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
Law for Business 15e Barnes
n n n n
Chapter 1-47 n
CHAPTER 1: LAW AND LEGAL REASONING
n n n n n
LECTUREnOUTLINE
1. DiscussnthenTwisdalencasenthatnopensnthisnchapter.nItnprovidesnanninterestingnvehiclenfornd
iscussingnthenfunctionsnofnlawnandnlegalninterpretation.
a. Havenyournstudentsnidentifynthenvariousnfunctionsnofnthenlawnandnthenndiscussnwhichnspec
ificnfunctionsnarenfurtherednbynthisnantiretaliationnaspectsnofnthenCivilnRightsnstatute.
b. Innthencontextnofnlegalninterpretation,nthencourtnfoundnthatnTwisdalendidnseemntonbenprotect
ednbasednonnthenliteralnlanguagenofnthenstatute.nHowever,nitnlookednbeyondnthenplainnmeani
ngntonrejectnhisnclaim.nSpecifically,nthencourtnbelievednthatninterpretingnthenlawninnanmanne
rnthatnwouldnprotectnhimnfromnretaliationnwouldnunderminenthenpurposenofnthenstatute.n Itnisn
conceivablenthatnthencourtnisnmotivatednbynpublicnpolicynconcernsnasnwell.
c. Whatndonyournstudentsnthinknofncourtsnwhondonlooknatnintentnandnpublicnpolicy?nUsenthisna
snanlead-innfornandiscussionnofnlegalnjurisprudence.
2. Questionnstudentsnaboutntheirndefinitionsnofn―law.‖nMakencertainntheynunderstandntheni
mportancenofnlawninnallnaspectsnofnournlives.
3. Discussnthenvariousnfunctionsnthatnlawnservesninnsociety.nYounmightndonthisnbynhavingnthenst
udentsnidentifynsomenofnthem.
a. Discussnthenconflictsnthatnarisenbetweennandnamongnthenvariousnfunctionsnofnlaw.nFornexam
ple,ntherenoftennarenconflictsnbetweennthengoalsnofnindividualnfreedomnandnachievingnsocialn
justice.nNotenthenproblemsnthatnarisenwhenntherenisnnonclearnconsensusnonnwhatnisnjust.
b. Asknthenstudentsnifntheynthinknthatnlawnevernisn―overused.‖nTheynarenlikelyntoncitennumerou
snexamples.nForninstance,nthisnmightnbenantimentontalknaboutnthenproductnliabilityncasesnthatn
arenregularlyninnthenheadlines.nPerhapsnthencaseninvolvingnthenwomannwhonburnednherselfn
withncoffeenfromnMcDonald’snwouldnbenappropriatenhere.
1-1
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
, c. Haventhenstudentsndiscussnwhatnitnmeansntonhaventhenlawnmaintainnorder.nYounmightnasknst
udentsnifnmaintainingnordernmeansnmaintainingnthenstatusnquo.nThisncannleadntonandiscussi
onnofnlegalnrealismnandnviewsnthatnlawnisnusednbynthoseninnpowerntonretainntheirnpower.
4. Therenisnantendencynfornpeoplentonthinknofnlawnasnimposingndutiesnwithoutnconsideringnhownitne
stablishesnandnpreservesnrights.nTalknaboutnhownournsystemntriesntonmatchnrightsnwithncorrespo
ndingnduties.
a. Explainnhownduties,nrights,nandnprivilegesnmakenupnsubstantivenlaw.
b. Explainnthatnproceduralnlawnprovidesnthenframeworknwithinnwhichnsubstantivenlawsnarenc
reatednandnenforced.nPointnoutnthatnChaptersn2nandn4noffernanmorendetailedndiscussionnofnpr
oceduralnlaw.
5. Asknthenstudentsntonthinknofnannexamplenofnandutynimposednbynsubstantivenlawnthatnmightnviola
tensomenmoralnornethicalnbelief.nThisnmightnbenangoodntimentontalknaboutnthenvariousnschoolsnofn
legalnjurisprudence.nHaventhemnspeculatenhownanlegalnpositivistnwouldndiffernfromnanlegalnsoci
ologistnornnaturalnlawntheoristninnhandlingnsuchnsituations.
6. Contrastncriminalnlawnwithncivilnlaw.
a. Pointnoutnthatnsocietynconsidersnitnmuchnworsentonbenconvictednofnancrimenthanntonbenheldnci
villynliable.nExplainnhow,nasnanresult,ntherenarenmorenexactingnproceduralnsafeguardsntonpro
tectnandefendantninnancriminalntrialnthanninnancivilntrial.
b. Notenthendifferencenbetweenncompensatoryndamagesnandnpunitivendamages.nDiscussnthenc
urrentnuproarnovernpunitivendamagesnandnthenSupremenCourt’snattemptntonreinnthemnin.nSe
enStatenFarmnMutualnAutomobilenInsurancenv.nCampbell,n123nS.Ct.n1513n(U.S.nSup.nCt.n
2003)n(establishingnguidepostsnforncalculatingnpunitivendamages).nPunitivendamagesnaren
discussednfurtherninnChaptern6.
c. Pointnoutnthatnoftennonencannbensubjectntonsanctionsnundernbothncriminalnandncivilnlawsn
withoutnviolatingnthenproscriptionnagainstn―doublenjeopardy.‖nFindnoutnifnthenstudentsnth
inknthatnpunitivendamagesninnancivilntrial,ncouplednwithnfinesninnancriminalntrial,nconstitu
tenantypenofndoublenjeopardy.
Marinellonv.nUnitednStates
MarinellonwasnchargednwithnthencrimenofncorruptlynimpedingnthenduenadministrationnofnthenTaxnC
odenafternhenengagedninnseveralnactivitiesnthatnunderreportednhisntaxablenincome.nHowever,nthe
U.S.nSupremenCourtnoverturnednhisncriminalnconvictionnbecausenMarinellonwasnunawarenthatnhen
wasnundern IRSninvestigationnatnthentimenofnhisnactivities.nCitingnthenneedntonconstruencriminal
1-2
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
,statutesnnarrowly,nthenCourtnrulednthatnthenparticularnstatute—thenOmnibusnClause—
didnnotncovernallnactivitiesnthatnunderreportednincome.nThenCourtnbelievednthatnthenstatutencoverednan
narrowernrangenofnactivitiesnaimedndirectlynatnthwartingnthenactivitiesnofninvestigationsnwhennthenta
xpayernknewnornshouldnhavenknownnanninvestigationnwasnunderway.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nThisncasenisnplacedninnthentextnasnannexamplenofnthengeneralnrulesnunderlyi
ngncriminalnlaw.nSpecifically,nanpersonngenerallyncannotnbenconvictednofnancrimenunlessnhenornshen
violatesnanstatute.nHowever,nsuchnstatutesnmustnbenobjectivelynclearntonanreasonablenperson.nThisn
Government’sninterpretationnofnthisnstatutenwasnbelievedntongrantnthenGovernmentntoonmuchndisc
retionninndeterminingnwhatnconstitutednancrime.
7. Thenbriefnintroductionntonournlegalnsystemnshouldnbenanreviewnfornmostnstudents.
a. ThenconstitutionalnlawnmaterialnisnmorenheavilyndiscussedninnChaptern4.nAnnargumentncannb
enmadenfornitntonbenpresentednimmediatelynfollowingnthisnchapter.nHowever,nwenbelievenstu
dentsnshouldnfirstnreviewnChaptern2’sndiscussionnofnthendisputenresolutionnsystem.
b. Talknaboutnthenrolenofnthencourtsninndeterminingnthenconstitutionalitynofnlegislation.nDont
heynbelieventhisngivesnthencourtsntoonmuchnpower?
c. Explainnthenrelationshipnbetweennstatenlawsnandnfederalnlaws.nMakencertainnthenstudentsnun
derstandnthatnstatenlawsnmaynnotnviolatenthenfederalnconstitutionnandnmustnbenconsistentnwit
hnfederalnstatutes.
HenrynScheinnv.nArchern&nWhitenSales
ThenFederalnArbitrationnActnprovidesnthatnpartiesnmay,nthroughntheirnpowerntoncontract,nagreenthatnt
heirndisputesnwillnbenarbitrated.nInnaddition,nthenActnallowsnthosensamenpartiesntonagreenthatnannarbit
rator,nrathernthannancourt,nwillndeterminenwhethernthatnarbitrationnclausenappliesntonanynparticularndi
sputentheynmaynhave.nHowever,nseveralnfederalnappellatencourtsncarvednoutnan―whollyngroundless‖ne
xceptionntonthenlatternrulenbynwhichntheynallowedncourtsntonconcludenthatnarbitrationnwasnnotnappro
priatenwhennthencourtnbelievednthenclaimnofnarbitrabilitynwasngroundless.nInnthisncase,nthenU.S.nSupr
emenCourt,ncitingnbothnthenstatutenandnSupremenCourtnprecedent,nrulednthatnthe
―whollyngroundless‖nexceptionnwasnimpermissiblenbecausenitncontradictednthenstatute.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nThisncasenisnannexamplenofnthenlimitsnonnthenjudiciary’sndiscretionnundernt
hencommonnlaw.nItnillustratesnthatninnthenhierarchynofnlaws,nlegislativenlawnisnsuperiorntonjudge-
nmadenlaw.n Itnalsonillustratesnthenrolenofnprecedentninninterpretingnstatutes.
8. Thenmaterialnonnstatutoryninterpretationncannbenextremelynimportantninnlayingnthenfoundationnf
ornhownlawyersnthink.nMorenimportantly,nitnteachesnstudentsnvaluablencriticalnthinkingnskills.nT
akenthenstudentsnthroughnthenprocessnforninterpretingnstatutes.nYounmayndiscussnstatutoryninter
pretationnandnlegalnjurisprudencentogether.nNotenhownpositivistsnoftennhavenproblems
1-3
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
, movingnbeyondnthen―plainnmeaning‖nofnwordsnwhilennaturalnlawntheoristsnandnlegalns
ociologistsnarenaccusednofnignoringnthem.
Bostocknv.nClaytonnCounty,nGeorgia
EmployersnarguednthatnCivilnRightsnAct’snprohibitionnagainstndiscriminationnbasednonnsexndidnnotnp
rotectnemployeesnwhonwerenfirednbecausentheynwerenhomosexualnorntransgender.nThenemployersnas
sertednthatnthenlawnshouldnnotnbenexpandedntonprotectnthesenemployeesnbecausenthenlegislatorsnwhon
originallynenactednthenstatutenwouldnnotnhavenenvisionednitnbeingnextendedninnthisnway.nThe
U.S.nSupremenCourtndisagreed.nItnfoundnnonambiguityninnthenplainnmeaningnofnthenstatute—
thenCourtnbelievednthenstatutorynlanguagenclearlynprohibitednsuchndiscriminationnbecausenitnwasnbas
ednonnsex.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nExplainnhownthencourtnrefusedntonlooknbeyondnthenplainnmeaningnofnthensta
tute,nconcludingnthatnitnwouldnbenwrongntonattemptntongleannthenintentnofneachnlegislatornwhonvote
dnfornthenlaw.nDiscussnwhethernthisnopinionnisntrulynlegalnpositivistninnnature.nExplorenhownitnmight
nhavenundertonesnofnlegalnsociology.
9. Discussnthenconceptnofnstarendecisis.
a. Notenhownstarendecisisnpromotesnstability.
Stewartnv.nJustice
Restaurantnownersnaskednthencourtntonenjoinnenforcementnofnannexecutivenordernrequiringnrestaur
antnemployeesnandncustomersntonwearnmasks.nThencourtnupheldnthenMasknMandate,nreasoningnth
atnitnwasnreasonablyndesignedntonprotectnthenhealthnofnthenpublicnfromnthenspreadnofnthenCOVIDnvi
rus.
PointsnfornDiscussion:nUsenthisncasentonexplainnthenprocessnofnstarendecisis.nNotenhownthencourt,nin
nthenabsencenofnclearnprecedentndealingnwithnCOVIDnrestrictions,nlookednfornguidancentonansmallp
oxncasendecidednbynthenU.S.nSupremenCourtnmorenthann100nyearsnago.nYounmightnalsonusenthisncase
ntondiscussnexecutivenordersnandntheirnplaceninnthenhierarchynofnlegalnrules.nExplainnhownexecutiven
ordersnmaynnotnviolatenconstitutionalnprotections.nThisncasenisnalsonconnectedntonChaptern4nandnitsn
discussionnofnduenprocess.
a. Notenhownstarendecisisnpermitsnchange.
b. Explainnhownthenrulenagainstnexnpostnfactonlawsndoesnnotnapplyntoninstancesnwherenthenc
ourtnhasnreinterpretednanstatute.nDiscussnhownthisncannposenproblemsnfornpeoplenwhonrel
iednonnthenoriginalninterpretation.
1-4
©nMcGrawnHillnLLC.nAllnrightsnreserved.nNonreproductionnorndistributionnwithoutnthenpriornwrittennconsentnofn
McGrawnHillnLLC.
