On another board I was given a challenge and I would like to poll the US lawyers to give an answer. (Don’t ask why I beat my head against right wing walls and their forums, I guess I’m just a glutton for punishment)
Have you read the constitution of the United States.
Have you read your states Constitution.
In what state do you reside?
Did you study the Constitution in law school or is precedent case law more emphasized? (feel free to expand a bit on this point if you like)
Are you a judge, practicing lawyer, retired lawyer or law student?
(Sorry non-US law types, this is specific to the US)
1.) Of course - Constitutional Law is a standard part of the first-year law school curriculum, and the Constitution is (I should hope!) always assigned reading.
2.) No - but then, I’m in DC, so we don’t really have on. I did read the New Hampshire constitution, when I lived in that state.
3.) None - I’m in DC.
4.) Well, we do both - I’ve taken a lot of constitutional law classes, but almost any law class is going to focus on case law (or statutory law, in some very painful cases). A standard class in constitutional law - whether it’s the first-year required class, First Amendment, National Security, etc. - is going to have you read a bunch of cases where someone is saying “hey, the government is violating the Constitution by doing X”. Even the classes that aren’t explicitly focused on constitutional law certainly draw on it a great deal - Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Evidence, and so on. That said, there are also classes that don’t draw all that much from the US Constitution, and would probably be taught almost the same way in any other common-law country - Torts comes to mind.
5.) I’m a law student, going into my third (and final) year.
Yes. I have a copy I keep in my bag, along with the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Parts only
New York State
Yes - a year (6 credit hours) is mandatory. The first semester focuses on the powers of the different parts of the Federal government and how they relate to the other parts and the states (or as my con law prof puts it, WHO DECIDES), the second semester focuses on individual rights. Additionally, Criminal Procedure (4 credit hours), covering the 4, 5, & 6th Amendments, is highly recommended as it is always heavily present on the Bar Exam - although technically optional, almost everyone takes it. Additionally, My Appellate Advocacy class involved an Equal Protection case - although the topic of the appellate brief is left to individual professors, many choose constitutional questions. Additional classes are available as electives.
The study of constitutional law requires the careful reading of the words of the Constitution as well as reading a large number of Supreme Court cases. Additionally, we discuss the theoretical underpinnings of constitutional analysis (for example, functionalist arguments, structuralist arguments, original understanding, founder’s intent, etc.)
5. I am a law student (starting 3rd year next fall)
Have you read the constitution of the United States.
Of course.
Have you read your states Constitution.
Of course.
In what state do you reside?
New York. I’ve also read Washington’s and Alaska’s.
Did you study the Constitution in law school or is precedent case law more emphasized? (feel free to expand a bit on this point if you like)
As far as I am aware, Constitutional Law is a required course at every ABA accredited law school - it’s considered a basic staple along with such things as Criminal Law, Torts, Property Law, Contract Law, Civil Procedure, etc. I’m not sure the question of whether studying the document itself or precedent are more emphasized is a useful one, though. Precedent (in theory) serves to illustrate applications of existing law, not replace study of the source material. Think of it like commentary sections on DVDs. The commentary in no way replaces watching the actual movie - it just helps you gain more insight into where the filmmaker was trying to go with it, or what (in the case of literary commentary) provides insight as to how other people have interpreted the source material. Precedent shows a lawyer how other practictioners and jurists have interpreted the source material - it shows the trend of thinking and understanding. It’s not like “studying the Constitution” and “precedent case law” are in any way mutually exclusive - I would, in fact, be exceptionally wary of any legal education program that failed to emphasize in the strongest possible fashion that one should always consult the source materials. I would consider it exceptionally sloppy lawyering to fail to consult the source materials (except in cases where you’re in familiar territory - if you’ve handled similar cases before, there’s no need to check again other than to do a check to make sure nothing has changed since your last foray into the territory).
Are you a judge, practicing lawyer, retired lawyer or law student?
None of the above. By my own choice, I do not practice, but am a member of the NY, WA and US Patent bars.
1. Have you read the constitution of the United States.
Yes. Some parts repeatedly and intensely (1st, 4th, 4th, 8th, 14th Amendments), some parts only a couple of times.
2. Have you read your states Constitution.
Yes.
3. In what state do you reside?
North Carolina.
4. Did you study the Constitution in law school or is precedent case law more emphasized? (feel free to expand a bit on this point if you like)
As others have said, Con Law is a required class so, sure, we studied it. I think the question of which is “more emphasized” is a false dichotomy, because I think you’re comparing apples and oranges. “Case law” is a type of source, like statutes or law review articles. The Constitution is a specific source.
5. Are you a judge, practicing lawyer, retired lawyer or law student?
None of the above. I train on legal issues but do not currently practice law.
Thanks for the responses so far. I know they sound like rather dumb questions, but the ‘point’ this women was attempting to make was that the law as it stands today isn’t based solidly in the constitution or as she likes to put it ‘old law’. She said to ask any lawyer these questions that I’ve put to you and I’m assuming she expects the answers to be no. I just wanted to get some responses from those that have studied and practiced law to demonstrate that she is full of it.
Well, a lot of it isn’t. What “law as it stands today” is she talking about? Broadly speaking, the Constitution presents parameters beyond which government may not stray in regulating the people. But most specific laws that people are bound by in the U.S are found in statutes (codified, published laws, passed by the legislative bodies), which are not based on the Constitution.
The Constitution sets out a broad framework for government. The Bill of Rights sets forth the rights of the people, which laws and government action may not infringe. But the laws themselves are legislative constructs. So I don’t think she’s full of it, actually, but I do think her assertion is so non-specific as to be meaningless.
I agree, she was essentially saying that she believes in “the Ten Commandments and the Constitution”. Here is a section of her ramblings to show where I came up with the questions I listed above.
Yes, several times starting in high school history class.
No, and few lawyers have. A state constitution can be as long as detailed as a statutory code. You don’t read it, you look up relevant clauses as needed.
Florida.
Constitutional law is a required course at most law schools, but studying it is studying “precedent case law.” You don’t just discuss the original text, you study how its interpretation has developed over time. The Constitution and con-law cases are studied in other courses as relevant.
Yes to all of the above. There is more precedent read because for each word of a constitution there are multiple cases interpreting it. NY resident, I’ve read both NY and CT (CT for s&g’s – I used to live there). Non practicing … I have no idea what I am, but I have the right to practice law.
I think one of the easiest and quickest ways of disabusing someone of such a notion/talking point is to ask them what due process means.
Yes, I’ve read the whole thing. It’s pretty short and pithy.
I’ve read parts of the NY State Constitution, and probably hit the whole thing over the course of my career. Like most state constitutions, it’s dry and convoluted.
New York.
I took the required course in Constitutional Law my first year. My professor’s method was to go through the whole thing, emphasizing its function as a blueprint for the federal government. Of course we studied case law, but most of what we looked at were the cases interpreting the balance of powers among the branches of the federal government and the states. We only spend a day or so on Constitutional criminal law and another day or so on civil rights.
Yes. Not every state that I’ve lived in, but every state in which I did a significant amount of legal research for (Hawaii, Michigan, Nevada, and Ohio come to mind).
Now, Michigan; previously, other states.
We never had a course where we were required to regurgitate the text of the constitution in law school. We studied sections of it, mostly in the context of cases or arguments made by commentators. I usually have a copy nearby because I don’t have the whole thing memorized.
Practicing lawyer. Licensed in Michigan and Hawaii (inactive).
On another board I was given a challenge and I would like to poll the US lawyers to give an answer. (Don’t ask why I beat my head against right wing walls and their forums, I guess I’m just a glutton for punishment)
Have you read the constitution of the United States.
Yes, many times - even before Law School.
Have you read your states Constitution.
Yes, more than once.
In what state do you reside?
Wyoming
Did you study the Constitution in law school or is precedent case law more emphasized? (feel free to expand a bit on this point if you like)
It really depended on the class, and even in classes where the Constitution was read extensively (Con Law, Criminal Procedure, 1st Amendment Jurisprudence), the Constitution was usually read and interpreted using applicable case law.
Are you a judge, practicing lawyer, retired lawyer or law student?
I train on legal issues but do not currently practice law.
I been there.