The first exam in COMM 491 asks you to become a Federal Appellate Judge and write opinions on first amendment cases that come to you (by way of the exam).

In the exam I will give you a description of court cases involving issues related to the first amendment.  The issue or issues in each case will be related to material found in Tedford, chapters 3 - 6.  The case description you will receive will be several paragraphs long, in a form similar to the case summaries provided in the "Landmark Case" boxes in Tedford.  The cases may be on appeal from a state court or from a federal district court.  The cases may involve a criminal prosecution (e.g. for sedition, obscenity, disturbing the peace) or they might involve a law suit (e.g. for defamation) or they might involve a court injunction forbidding some form of expression (e.g. a gag order).

Your task will be to render a complete decision in essay form for the cases as if you were an appeals court judge using the "Two-Level Theory" found in Tedford, pp. 458-464.  

• Be sure to explain your reasoning at each step of the two-level decision process and cite appropriate case law.

• Be sure you have cited THE definitive precedent case from the U.S. Supreme Court for your decision.

• Be sure you have decided ALL issues of relevance to the case.  (Some cases may have more than one first amendment issue involved and, thus, have more than one definitive precedent setting case.)

Mechanics of the Exam

1. The exam will take place on Monday, March 21 in the COMM Lab (WH320).  I will give you a copy of the cases for you to decide in hard copy and by email.  You may take the exam on computer lab or in writing

2. You must email me your answers/decisions within two hours of opening and beginning the exam. 

3. The exam is open book/open notes/open web.  In fact, you may use any resources you wish except other living human beings.  Thus, you must work alone and not collaborate with classmates or others.

In studying for the exam you might want to identify which SCOTUS cases are current precedent and which have been superseded by later cases.  Of course you should be generally familiar with all the material we've read so far.  [ I doubt two hours will be enough time to figure out what's covered in what chapter, digest it, determine the appropriate precedent setting case(s) and then write decisions dealing with each of the steps in Tedford's two-level theory. ]

In grading the exams I will consider the following factors (roughly in order of importance):

• Clarity and effectiveness in use of the steps in Tedford's Two-level Theory.

• Correct use of the necessary, appropriate precedent cases.

• Clarity and reasonableness of your explanations for each element of your decision.

• Correctness of your decisions.

• Quality of your writing.