Course Readings

Each session’s readings are in their respective folders and linked below.

Class Date
Session – Subject
Written Assignment Due the Following Session

5-21 M
1 – Introduction to Strategic Federalism Litigation
Federalist 39, 45 & 46
Pritcher – abstract
Pfander – Sections I, IV-V
Bond – Section III
Voluntary readings
Printz abstract (Scalia on federalism)

5-23 W
2 – Standing
Lujan – abstract
Hunt – abstract
Bond – abstract
ATI v Colorado
         Def. Motion to Dismiss
         Intervenors Motion to Dismiss
         Plaintiffs Responses
Draft a finding (must be approximately 5 double spaced pages) on Colorado’s motion to dismiss with regard to constitutional, prudential and organizational standing.

5-30 W
3 – 10th Amendment
Sheriff – Nullification in one lesson
SD v Dole – Abstract
Schwinn – ACA and Tenth Amend.
Comstock – Abstract
Thom More Law Center – Abstract
42 USC 7509

6-4 M
4 – Petition-litigation
Declaratory Judgment
First Amendment
5 USC 553(e)
EPA rules
Bull Run v EPA
NRDC Lead Petition
EPA 2009 Lead Proposal
28 USC 2201 – annotated

6-6 W
5 – FOIA Part I
EPA v Mink
DOJ v Reporters – abstract
GC Micro Corp – abstract
Vaughn v. Rosen – abstract

6-11 M
6 – FOIA Part II
Read and wander through
DOJ Manual – Litigation Considerations.  Read Page 1 and scan the full document.

Hansen FOIA

Assignment: Identify an agency that you could FOIA and the subject matter you would want to obtain. Draft a FOIA to that Agency. 

6-13 W
7 – Data Quality Act
WRRI DQA Synopsis
Data Quality Act
AAAS Policy Brief
Salt Institute
PrimeTime v Vilsack – abstract
Americans for Safe Access
PIRG v Main – abstract

6-18 M
8 – Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFA in a Nutshell
North Carolina Fisheries
Aeronautical Repair
Southern Offshore Fishing I
Southern Offshore Fishing II

6-20 W
9 Paperwork Reduction Act Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
PRA Primer
Center for Auto Safety
Saco River
US v Farley
Summary of UFMA
2 USC 1531-34
2 USC 1571
Associated Builders
Offer a basis for standing that would allow the court to remand a final agency action due to data quality act errors, or offer a basis for a legal challenge to a rule where the agency failed to conduct a UMRA analysis.

6-25 M
10 Citizen suits
Bull Run Coalition
Citizen Suit Standing abstracts
Steel Co. v Citizens
Friends of the Earth v Laidlaw

6-27 W
Hawkins – NEPA Primer
Major NEPA Case Outline – scan only
Sierra Club v RUS
CEQ 2009 Litigation Survey

7-2 M
12 Executive Orders as a cause of action
EO 12866 (1)(b), (4)(c), (6)(a), (10)
Executive Order Judicial Review Citations
Work Assignment Fact Precise
Extreme NEPA Claim – suggest an outrageous “significant” action for which there was no EIA/EIS prepared.

7-9 M
Litwiller – SLAPP

7-10 W
Schwinger RICO Law Reporter
Anza v Ideal Steel
Hammel v State – Complaint
SD Cal RICO Case Statement Form

Assignment revisions due.

Comments are closed.