WEEK 1
ADVICE ON ANSWERING WEEKLY HOMEWORK QUESTIONS: Answer these in essay form. Do not just give a short, one-sentence or bullet-point answer. You need to be comprehensive and expansive in addressing the issues raised in the questions. When using a source, make sure you cite it using Chicago style, and also include the page number (if available). You are being graded on your comprehension of the readings and the only way I can judge that is the quality of your writing. When uploading a document for your homework responses, please use Word documents. Do NOT use “Pages”.
Charles Krauthammer, “Free Willy!” Washington Post (May 7. 2015)(http://wapo.st/1JSSzmH (Links to an external site.))
- What is Krauthammer’s thesis and what evidence is used to support it?
- Do you agree with his argument? Why or why not? Explain.
Robert Garner, “Political Science and Animal Studies,” Society and AnimalsVol. 10, No. 4 (2002), pp. 395-401, access this and other articles through MSU Library web portal: https://www.montclair.edu/library/ (Links to an external site.)
According to Garner’s article, what are the various explanations for why people join animal rights groups?
- What is the difference between a “pressure group” and a “new social movement”?
The Nonhuman Rights Project v. Stanley, Petitioner’s Memo (available in “Files”)
- What are the factual allegations made by the petitioner?
- What are the legal theories used by the petitioner?
- What does the petitioner want the court to do? What’s the result, legally and practically, the petitioner is seeking?
Strickland v. Medlen, 397 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. 2013) (access through MSU Library’s web portal using Westlaw Next)
TIP: Enter the case citation “397 S.W.3d 184” in the search bar in Westlaw Next and it will take you to the case. Read the entire case. Also, note there is a short explanation on how to read a case in the Files section entitled, “Sources Cases Briefs – O’Brien”.
1. What is the reasoning supporting the court’s decision in Strickland?
2. What are the interest groups involved?
3. YOUR OPINION: What do you think of the court’s reasoning? Is it sound? Why or why not? Explain.
0 comments