1. The United States does not currently have a policy of using racial profiling, secret police surveillance or a national identity card system. The federal government recently announced new guidelines expanding the definition of racial profiling to include religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity. However, there will be exceptions for large agencies, including the Transportation Safety Administration and the Border Patrol. Think about the implications of implementing these "anti-terrorist" security systems. Discuss these tactics in light of the chapters on legal force, legal rights, legal techniques, law and popular will, or think creatively and approach the statement from a perspective (and course readings) you see fitting.
2. A legal scholar and educator, Paul Campos, says the following in a book on law and legal education:
...in my mind, the lawyers who do the most damage are not crooked lawyers, are not incompetent lawyers, but are the true believers--are the ones who are charging out there, waving the First Amendment or whatever it might be--shouting, "there is a fundamental right to this, and if we blow up this social edifice in order to validate this right we are going to do it because the law requires it to be so." Here I think the relevant analogy is that of the religious fanatic. Somebody who has no doubts about what God is requiring that he do is a dangerous person. And somebody who has that same attitude about the law is also a dangerous person.
Discuss in light of the chapters on the legal profession, legal education, lawyers and the adversary process, on law in relation to custom, or think creatively and approach the comment from a perspective (and the course readings) you see fitting.
3. Discuss the issues involved in jury nullification. What are the issues involved? Why is jury nullification controversial? What are the ethical issues involved for jury members and attorneys? What does the practice of nullification say about the US legal system?