The structure of essay will be:-
1-first 1/2-3/4 page introduce the general topic and the readings to be discussed.
2- in about 4 pages, compare and contrast Garald Rosenberg’s “constrained court model” (and his critic of “dynamic court model”) as explained in “The Hollow Hope”( from page 1-36 only), with Stuart Scheingold’s critic of the “myth of rights” as explained in “The politics of Rights” (from page 3-38 only)
3- in about 1.25-1.75 pages apply either Rosenberg’s argument regarding the conditions under which courts can produce social change or Scheingold’s analysis of “myth of rights” to illuminate the following scenarios:
- A) Imagine that the US Supreme Court decide to declare any form of affirmative action in the use of college/university admissions (including the undergrad,post-grad, and professional school admissions) an unconstitutional violation of the constitution’s 14th amendment.
Utilizing your analysis of the excerpt from Rosenberg or Scheingold provide in part two,explain what you think will be the likely (or a very possible) consequence of such a ruling. for example do you see affirmative action ending almost at once on public university campuses?Gradually? not much,if at all? Something else? explain
The readings and sources of the essay will be :-
1- Garald Rosenberg’s “The Hollow Hope”( from page 1-36 only),
2-Stuart Scheingold’s “The politics of Rights” (from page 3-38 only
YOU CAN ALSO PLACE OTHER SIMILAR ORDERS ON OUR WEBSITE AND GET AMAZING DISCOUNTS!!!