Crim C10 - Midterm Study Guide
Crim C10 - Midterm Study Guide Crm/Law C10
Popular in FND CRM, LAW & SOC
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Criminology and Criminal Justice
This 29 page Study Guide was uploaded by Edward Avakian on Tuesday April 26, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to Crm/Law C10 at University of California - Irvine taught by William Thompson in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 39 views. For similar materials see FND CRM, LAW & SOC in Criminology and Criminal Justice at University of California - Irvine.
Reviews for Crim C10 - Midterm Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/26/16
Crim C10 Midterm Study Guide 04/25/2016 ▯ Midterm will go through Aristotle situation (chapter 9) 50 questions multiple choice Everything he’s assigned for us to read, YouTube videos, ted talk = will be fair game for the midterm ▯ ▯ Review for midterm ▯ ▯ Philosophies (who, what, when, where, why, how) 1) Utilitarians o Greatest good for the greatest # of people 2) Libertarians o Respect individual rights o Minimize governmental coercion, except where necessary o In favor of criminal law or any law that deprives another individual of something (property, etc.); stealing from an individual 3) Kantians o The Categorical Imperative o Respect for other persons o Notion of universal rights o Rational beings should have dignity and respect 4) Rawlsians o 1- Veil of ignorance (not knowing what position you should be born into) Certain rights are absolutely protected under the veil of ignorance o 2- Difference principle People shouldn’t benefit from mere accidents of birth We shouldn’t treat people differently from happenstance Treat people with equality 5) Aristotilians o people are virtuous if they contribute to society o Telos = everything has a purpose and natural purpose; the best flute deserve the best flute players ▯ ▯ Types of laws 1) common law o law set by precedent 2) legislative law o law created by Congress 3) constitutional law o 4) administrative law o law that governmental agencies set (FDA) 5) tort law o compensation you would receive for civil lawsuits ▯ ▯ People 1) Emile Durkheim o 2) Aristotle o 3) Karl Marx o 4) John Rawls o 5) Jeremy Bentham o 6) John Stewart Mill o 7) Robert Nozick (pg 62-64, 219) o 8) Immanuel Kant o 9) Jonathan Haidt o 10) Michael Sandel o the moral of the story in his book o topics he’s discussed 11) Robert Lee (pg 236 of book) o 12) Friedrich Hayek (pg 61, road to serfdom) o 13) Milton Friedman o ▯ ▯ Fundamental Values 1) Harm/care o 2) Fairness/reciprocity o 3) In group/loyalty o 4) Authority/respect o 5) Purity/sanctity o Go over these articles lions, romans queen v Dudley and Stevens NYT military lending act Paul Krugman article 2008 financial Crisis loan fraud trolley NY times “state taxes” Harrison Bergeron “handicap for equality” PGA Tour Elections FCC, Howard Stern US Constitution, Article 1 “The normal and the pathological” ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 1 Week 1 03/29/2016 ▯ This course will examine some key foundational questions underlying the study of crime, law, and society, such as: What should, and should not, be illegal? What kind of law ought we have? What laws are just, fair, optimal? What is justice? ▯ ▯ These kinds of questions are most commonly discussed in moral philosophy, but are important in evaluating the law. We’ll consider the overview provided by Michael Sandel in his book “Justice.” ▯ ▯ Consider people torturing/killing animals in China for sexual gratification = crime EX) Woman clothed in loose garments stepping on a cat ▯ ▯ Criminology = crime, why people do it, how to solve it ▯ ▯ Law and society = the law and where it comes from The underlying social, political, and economic forces that lead law to be developed ▯ ▯ Central questions in Crim, Law & Society Where does law come from? Why do we have the particular laws we have? Why are some things criminal? Why do laws change over time? o In other words, who make the rules, and why? Who breaks the rules and why? How and how well do we deal with rule breakers? ▯ ▯ Questions about origin of law—Why we have the laws we have Procedural/Jurisprudential – What legislative, judicial or regulatory activity created these laws? Social theory—What social forces led society to adopt these laws? Psychological—What causes individuals to favor particular kinds of laws? ▯ ▯ Social Theory Perspective Emile Durkheim—law is the product of social consensus (shared values) o Law is based in individual morality o Argues that it is impossible to eliminate crime; there’s always going to be variation in behavior o Some of us will always find objections to what others are doing; “our way is better than their way” o Crime is a perfectly normal thing Karl Marx—law is a tool used by a dominant elite to protect their economic interests o All about economics and power o Society is divided up into classes and there are certain people who have more money and more power than other people; they have disproportionate influence on political process and use that influence to bring about laws that benefit them more than others Max Weber—law is the result of a formal, rational process of deliberation o Law changes over time because we become more rational and more consistent with our true underlying values o Idealistic viewpoint on law ▯ ▯ Justice How to distribute the fruits of prosperity and burdens of hard times? How to define the basic rights of citizens? What does it mean to maximize welfare, respect freedom and cultivate virtue? ▯ ▯ What makes a good law? 1) Does it promote the general welfare, contribute to human happiness, and reduce suffering? (utilitarian approach) 2) Respect individual rights? 3) Promote virtue and the good life? ▯ ▯ Midterm and final exams are going to be multiple choice (maybe 50 questions) ▯ ▯ Attend 6/9 discussion sections = extra credit ▯ ▯ Utilitarianism English philosophers John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) were the leading proponents of what is now called “classic utilitarianism” ▯ ▯ The Basic idea of utilitarianism The greatest happiness principle: o “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” – John Stuart Mill o Happiness = pleasure, and the absence of pain o Unhappiness = pain, and the absence of pleasure ▯ ▯ Happiness is the only thing that has intrinsic value “pleasure, and freedom for pain, are the only things desirable as ends…all desirable things are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain” ▯ ▯ Utilitarians were social reformers They supported suffrage for women and those without property, and the abolition of slavery. Utilitarians argued that criminals ought to be reformed and not merely punished (although Mill did support capital punishment as a deterrent) Bentham spoke out against cruelty to animals Mill was a strong supporter of meritocracy ▯ ▯ Proponents emphasized that utilitarianism was an egalitarian doctrine Everyone’s happiness counts equally ▯ ▯ The Trolley Problem Try to simplify the situation down and to say “what would you do” or “what would be the morally right thing to do” EX) Should you save the greatest number? (Trolley going straight and killing 5 people or turning trolley off track and kill one) ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 2 Week 1 03/31/2016 ▯ Foundational Questions What laws are just? What laws ought we have? o Utilitarian approach –consequences for happiness o Human rights approach o Focus on virtue Why do we have the laws we have? o Social consensus about values (Durkheim) Murder is bad in a consensus and it should be illegal By making murder illegal and making it punishable to commit murder, passing of laws is a way for society to portray its values and refine itself o Influence of the economic elite (Marx) People who are wealthy have disproportionate influence through media, education, etc. so people learn how to think about certain types of things o Rational ideals (Weber) Why do people favor some laws over others? o A question addressed by psychologists like Jonathan Haidt (see his TED video) o Examines how liberals and conservatives focus on values Harm – more important for liberals Fairness – more important for liberals Loyalty Purity/Sanctity Authority; conservatives view all points as equal ▯ Initial Focus: Moral Philosophy Methodology – hypothetical moral dilemmas Used to: o Illustrate the nature of moral arguments o Identify conflicts between theory and moral perceptions (which can stimulate insights and analysis) ▯ Moral/Legal Issue #1 Should there be a law against price gouging during emergencies? ▯ California Price Gouging Law Prohibits increasing the price of goods and services more than 10% after the governor declares a state of emergency California passed this form of anti-price gouging law in 1994, based on events of price gouging during the Northridge earthquake of 1993 Penalty: imprisonment for up to a year; fines up to $10,000. ▯ Martin Shkreli CEO, Turing Pharmaceuticals o Company he controlled bought the rights to a drug that treated parasitic infections o Selling for $13 a pill he raised the price to $750 or so a pill Did he behave morally? o Called before Congress to explain his views o He had the libertarian rights view of point Should his actions have been illegal? ▯ Moral character and military valor Purple Heart – who gets it? Why? o The Purple Heart is awarded to members of the armed forces of the US who are wounded by an instrument of war in the hands of the enemy and posthumously to the next of kin in the name of those who are killed in action or die of wounds received in action. It is specifically a combat decoration. o Honors sacrifice not bravery Should it be awarded to those with PTSD? This is an example of how the utilitarian theory can’t answer all the issues ▯ Special forces in Afghanistan ▯ ▯ The Basic idea of utilitarianism ▯ ▯ Objections to utilitarianism Human rights argument o For certain things, whether everyone is happy or not, you need to respect the rights of every human being Difficulty of “trans-personal utility comparisons” o How do you measure people’s happiness? How do you compare my happiness against yours? ▯ The Trolley Problem Should you always save the greatest number of people possible, possibly at the cost of one life? o Sandel’s answer = utilitarianism isn’t always the answer; you need human rights ▯ The Mignonette, 1884 (Queen v Dudley) Parker evidently was the sickest, and he had no wife or children; it only seemed fair, Dudley reasoned, that he be the one killed Parker was 17 years old and an inexperienced seaman ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 3 Week 2 04/05/2016 ▯ Philosophical Basis of Law Utilitarianism o Maximize collective welfare (greatest good for greatest #) o Emphasis on government action for common good ▯ ▯ Objections to utilitarianism Human rights Difficulty of “trans-personal utility comparisons”— o How do you measure and compare “happiness”? ▯ ▯ The Mignonette, 1884 (Queen v Dudley) Parker evidently was the sickest, and he had no wife or children; it only seemed fair, Dudley reasoned, that he be the one killed Parker was 17 years old and an inexperienced seaman Was it good or bad to eat him? Should they be punished? ▯ ▯ Legal Culpability for Homicide When do we punish people for taking the life for another? Murder = Homicide (actus reus) + Malice (mens rea), without justification, excuse or mitigation o 1 Degree—premeditation and deliberation, or specified method o 2 nddegree—absence of premeditation and deliberation Manslaughter—homicide w/o malice or with mitigation ▯ ▯ Was this murder? What if Parker had been 82? What is Parker gave his permission? What did the court decide? Necessity is not a defense to murder Dudley and Stephens were convicted but their sentence was reduced ▯ ▯ Utilitarianism and the Ford Pinto In order to keep the price down, Ford made certain compromises regarding safety Was Ford wrong to do so? Was Ford legally responsible for resulting injuries? ▯ ▯ Tort Law (Accidents and Civil Wrongs) Tort = a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability. When are you legally liable for harm you cause others? Negligence (you have to have a duty to a certain amount of care and you fail to do it) Harm “Defective Design” Harm Was the Pinto defective? Should Ford be liable? ▯ ▯ Ford’s Cost/Benefit Analysis for Pinto Costs o Sales: 11 million cars, 1.5 million light trucks o Unit cost: $11 per car, $11 per truck o Total Cost: 11M * $11 + 1.5M * 11 = $137M Benefits o Savings: 180 burn deaths, 180 serious burn injuries, 2100 burned vehicles o Unit cost: $200,000 per death, $67,000 per injury, $700 per vehicle o Total benefit: 180 * $200K + 180 * 67K + 2100 * 700 = $49.5M ▯ ▯ Philosophical Basis of Law Libertarianism o Respect individual rights o Minimize governmental coercion, except where necessary What “rights” should be protected? Declaration of Independence: o “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…” 5 amendment: o “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” o Due process of law = requirements of having established rules and procedures that have to be met before it can be done ▯ ▯ Libertarianism and Law Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992) o “The Road to Serfdom” Milton Friedman (1912-2006) o “Capitalism and Freedom” Excessive government is a threat to individual liberties ▯ ▯ Law for Libertarians Criminal Law o What kinds would they favor? Any that deprives another individual of something (property, etc); stealing from an individual o What kinds would they oppose? No harm done Contract Law o Enforcing bargains Tort Law o Law of accidents Property Law o Protecting private property ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 4 Week 2 04/07/2016 ▯ Philosophical Basis of Law Utilitarianism o Maximize collective welfare o Emphasis on government action for common good Libertarianism o Respect individual rights (life, liberty, property) o Minimize government coercion, except where necessary to protect individual rights o Tend to favor smaller, weaker government ▯ ▯ Key differences on law and policy Taxation to promote general welfare Regulation of markets/commerce These issues also separate Democrats and Republicans o Democrats = more utilitarian, more taxation, more regulation of markets and commerce o Republicans = anti tax, anti regulation ▯ ▯ Law Libertarians Like (or at least tolerate) Some government, some laws enforced by government; understand there are limits; need some sort of system to resolve conflict Criminal Law o Laws that are designed to protect us, protect our liberties; laws against crimes that harm individuals by punishing individuals if they commit some harm Tort law (law that involves compensating people through civil law system for harms that are done either accidentally or intentionally) Property law o Involves some sort of regulation as to how you can use your property (potential for incompatible uses of property) Contract law o Enforcement of bargains and agreements o Libertarians like free markets/free enterprise; keeping government out of commercial realm and letting people do business with each other as they like Property Real Property o Real estate; something tangible and immovable like land Personal property o Tangible assets Things like automobiles, clothing, tools o Intangible assets Financial instruments (stocks, bonds, options, derivatives) Intellectual (trademarks, copyrights, patents, domain names, etc.) Are property rights absolute? ▯ ▯ Limits on private use of property Nuisance law o You can’t use your real estate in a way that creates a nuisance for someone else Zoning law o Creating laws in how a property in a certain zone or section can be used (single-family home zones, department zones, shopping centers, residential areas) o Involve government intervention in people’s free use of property o More of a utilitarian rationale; most libertarians would not like zoning laws Eminent domain o Come up in presidential campaigns o A document that allows the government to take over private property o Problematic in a libertarian perspective; how can it be that the government can take over your property (violation of individual liberties o Government can take over property for public purpose if they supply just compensation Contractual agreements—conditions, covenants, and restrictions o Regulations that are created with the purchase of a property to control how it is used ▯ ▯ Laws Libertarians hate Taxation for o Income redistribution o Health and welfare of others Economic regulation o Interferes with liberty o Undermines ability of free markets to maximize utility E.g., price controls lead to poor distribution of resources (i.e. rent control laws) ▯ ▯ Law Libertarians hate (but most Republicans like) Regulation of vice—e.g., drugs, prostitution, pornography Regulation of reproduction—e.g., contraception, abortion Regulation of unacceptable/immoral markets—e.g., body parts, babies ▯ ▯ Was the US founded on a libertarian model? Tea Party/Constitutionalist position The US Constitution o Article I, Section 8 ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 5 Week 3 04/14/2016 ▯ Sources of Law Constitutions Legislation (at federal and state levels) Case Law/Judicial Precedent o Interpretation of Other Laws o Common Law — Created solely by precedent Administrative Law (i.e. EPA issuing new rules, IRS new rulings) Executive Actions?? (Has effect of law, “kind of” law) o When you write your paper, identify the type of law ▯ ▯ The US Constitution Utilitarian or Libertarian? What are the powers of Congress? o (Article 1 Section 8) Does the constitution authorize federal regulation of: o civil rights? o Environment? o Markets and economy? o Health care? ▯ ▯ Expansion of Federal Powers Tea Party/Constitutionalist Narrative o Liberal Judicial activism leading to Over-regulation Nanny State “Road to Serfdom" Progressive Narrative o “Living Constitution” protecting against Discrimination Exploitation Market Excess ▯ ▯ John Locke Social Contract Theory (In order to form political union in government, citizens of country can come into agreement of how it should be run) ▯ ▯ Notion of Universal Human Rights (Immanuel Kant) All humans are worthy of respect. It is wrong to treat them as mere instruments of the collective happiness. Morality is not about maximizing happiness or any other end; it is about respecting persons as ends in themselves ▯ ▯ Libertarian with a Twist Kant is a libertarian with a twist- he sees the buying and selling in the market as satisfying desires we haven’t chosen to have. Just because something gives the majority of people pleasure it doesn’t make it right Don’t look to God or the Gods as a basis for morality. Kant says use “pure practical reason” We are rational beings, capable of reason and are autonomous beings capable of acting and choosing freely We do seek pleasure and avoid pain but reasoning should govern our will, not desire To act freely is to act according to a law you have given yourself Heteronomy refers to action that is influenced by a force outside the individual To act freely is not to choose the best means to a given end, it is to choose the end itself ▯ ▯ Morality Morality flows from the intentions from which the act is done, what matters is the motive, doing the right thing because it’s right ▯ ▯ categorical imperative? ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 6 Week 3 04/14/2016 ▯ Immanuel Kant Notion of universal human rights o All humans are worthy of respect. It is wrong to treat them as mere instruments of the collective happiness Rejects utilitarianism – can’t treat people as a means to an end o Morality is not about maximizing happiness or any other end. It is about respecting persons as ends in themselves You can’t lie, but you can mislead ▯ ▯ Morality Morality flows from the intentions from which the act is done, what matters is the motive You must do things for the right reasons What are the right reasons? o Not self-gratification o Not utility maximization o You must do it because it is right ▯ ▯ So what makes an action right? The Categorical Imperative o Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it become a universal law o Act in such a way that you treat humanity never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end o Same as “golden rule”? Not exactly ▯ ▯ Kant and… Lying to a murderer o Not about what you want or achieving desirable goals; it’s about if this act is the right thing to do Clinton/Lewinsky scandal Casual sex o Using someone else to achieve your own ends, your own self- gratification o Having sex is not good in itself, even if it’s very pleasing ▯ ▯ Should the law allow… Utilitarian o Assisted suicide Would say sometimes or maybe; depends on assessment on if it’s beneficial or not o Euthanasia Would say sometimes or maybe; depends on assessment on if it’s beneficial or not Libertarian o Assisted suicide Yes, if the person is choosing to die, they should be in control of their own life o Euthanasia Without their consent, absolutely not because you can’t impose your will on someone else’s life Kantian o Assisted suicide Never o Euthanasia Never ▯ ▯ Why do we punish criminals? What is the purpose of punishment? Utilitarian o Improve overall happiness through: Deterrence Incapacitation Rehabilitation o What benefits can we achieve by punishment o No excessive punishment Libertarian o Protect rights of others Kantian o Because they deserve it (Just deserts) o Freedom entails responsibility o Reestablishing a moral balance o IT is the right thing to do ▯ ▯ Kant’s implications for law Rejects utilitarian considerations o E.g., whether the death penalty deters murder o E.g., whether Obamacare reduces overall health care costs Bases law on an “imagined” social contract o Could the law have been produced by the “united will of the nation”? o There is only one law that is “right” o What is people disagree with this? ▯ ▯ The case of equality John Rawls (1921-2002) What’s right for the individual vs. what’s right for society The social contract – a hypothetical agreement in an original position of equality (that is a position in which we set aside our self- interests, moral and religious convictions) Veil of ignorance – assessment of how law should be without taking a position in society We would not choose utilitarian since we might end up in a position of oppressed minorities o If we don’t know what position we would have in society, then a purely utilitarian society would not be desirable We would not choose Libertarian since we might end up wealthy but we could end up very poor ▯ ▯ The existence of a contract does not necessarily justify the terms. Making a deal is not enough to make it fair ▯ ▯ Rawls suggests that those with talent and endowments use the rewards from these to benefit society as a whole ▯ ▯ Natural talents are not your own, you don’t create them or deserve them more than others ▯ ▯ ▯ ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 7 Week 4 04/19/2016 ▯ John Rawls 1- Veil of ignorance (not knowing what position you should be born into) o Certain rights are absolutely protected under the veil of ignorance 2- Difference principle o People shouldn’t benefit from mere accidents of birth o We shouldn’t treat people differently from happenstance o Treat people with equality ISSUE: Whether innate talent falls within this category; certain people are born being extraordinarily good-looking and make money by being a model/actor; Rawlsian dispute = do they deserve that or is it morally arbitrary difference? o Rawls says yes, it is morally arbitrary; certain people just have a greater endowment; not something you deserve, it’s a benefit you get; not fair that people in that position should gain more wealth and fame as a result o We do have to recognize that some of the wealth and income they acquire has to be spent for the benefit for the rest of the community (i.e., taxation). Libertarians wouldn’t accept this; you should have the benefit of whatever work you have You have to ask both questions: is it a society that I would want to live in and does the law treat people differently based on morally arbitrary characteristics? ▯ ▯ Theories of wealth distribution—based on Rawl’s “difference principle” Feudal o Fixed hierarchy (top-down control) o King/queen controlled everything o He could pass down power and land to dukes/duchesses/lords o King would be very rich; peasants would be very poor (be only as rich as the lords above them allowed them to be) o Utilitarian view – fine for few people at the top; terrible for peasants below them o Libertarian view – what about human rights? How much liberty do you have if you live in a feudal society? You’re dominated by the people who live above you (control came from the top-down; people who were at the bottom had no control of government); they would want to engage in whatever business/commerce they wish to engage in; not a great system at all o Rawlsian view – living in such a system is not what you would reasonably choose due to the hierarchical aspect of it Libertarian o Formal equality & unfettered capitalism o What type of system would you like to see? Libertarians want some sort of formal equality (constitutional rights = rights of life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness); everybody can engage in business and commerce as they would like; government provides certain limited protections and setting up a free market wherein people can engage in business; people can choose how to use their talents and abilities o Price gouging would be okay (someone sells bottle of water for $100 to someone who is dying of thirst) o Rawlsian view – libertarians are being naïve; you need some government intervention to achieve fairness; in order to achieve true egalitarian, you need some leveling of inequalities due to arbitrary differences Meritocratic o Government regulation to achieve “fair equality” o No price gouging o Some government intervention Egalitarian o Based on Rawls’ “difference principle” o Fine for government to take money away from people who make too much o Taxation is perfectly justified for wealth redistribution if the wealth was gained by arbitrary differences ▯ ▯ Feudalism Morally arbitrary Coercive ▯ ▯ Unfettered capitalism Endowment effects o Libertarians say there will be a free market; the critics say well, some people are born into richer families, some are born into poorer families o If you’re born into richer family, you get some endowment from that – better schooling, better jobs, prestigious employment (unfair starting point) Monopoly and coercion o The libertarians say it’s a free market o Critics say how free is it? Suppose you’re born in a town where it’s a small town in the south where the only industry is the production of cotton mills; either work at a farm sharecropping where the owners are going to charge a whole lot to use their land or you can work at the cotton mill (be paid however much the owner of the mill wants to pay you— coerce their employees) o Libertarians would say you can leave the town and go elsewhere o Critics say that it’s often not that free; you have to make choices based off of economic necessity Fraud o We see mild forms of this in credit card agreements; people are led to think they are getting one thing but get something else ▯ ▯ Rise of regulatory state Wages and hours o Unfettered capitalism = requiring people to work many hours (bakers in New York to work 14-16 hours a day); at the time there weren’t many jobs o Get government involved to set minimum wages and maximum hours at which people could work o Libertarians view – government taking away liberty for employers by having them set minimum wages and maximum hours of pay o Lochner v New York (1905) D said the law is unconstitutional, inconsistent from what the framers of our country intended for our constitution Claimed his constitutional rights have been violated; interference with his basic liberty (5 amendment) Supreme Court agreed taking a libertarian approach by agreeing that the government can’t regulate hours and wages Supreme Court at the time was conservative and libertarian at the time o The courts interpretation of the liberty clause began to loosen up later on and more government regulation was allowed (5 th amendment) You can deprive people of certain liberties when they violate the law and send them to jail o Mueller v Oregon (1907) Women were working in assembly lines with wood Introduction to utilitarian thinking to Supreme Court Oregon bill regulated the number of hours women could work to 12 hours; seen as a progressive reform Interstate commerce o Interstate commerce commission ICC (first federal administrative government agency) o Railroads became involved in agricultural commerce (most efficient means of transportation = strong bargaining tool) Raise rates to exploitative levels or what the farmers thought were exploitative levels since they had a monopoly on transportation Anti-Trust Legislation o Power to break up monopolies Food and drug act o Federal agency to regulate the purity of food and drugs to keep people from freely choosing to purchase some dangerous food or drug Failed New Deal Economic Legislation o NIRA o Agricultural Adjustment Act o 1) Roosevelt was president for 4 terms; appointed many Supreme Court justices who were more progressive in their opinions o 2) Roosevelt threatened the Supreme Court; workload was very high; increased justices to 17 from 9 to reduce workload; conservatives were appalled; Supreme Court became more progressive ▯ ▯ Crim C10 Lecture 8 Week 4 04/22/2016 ▯ Liberty in the Constitution We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 5th Amendment: No person shall be....deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law 14th Amendment: Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ▯ ▯ When should government limit economic liberty? Preventing harm to others o Fraud/deceit o Externalities, e.g., pollution o Nuisance o Exploitation, e.g., of children, incompetents Preventing unfair bargains? o Traps for unwary—e.g., deceptive credit practices; consumer protection o Superior bargaining position Gouging Monopolies Civil Rights o Employment o Housing o Hotel & restaurants o College admission Discrimination against the disadvantaged Discrimination in favor of disadvantaged Economic redistribution? o Public health and welfare Rights arguments Utilitarian arguments o Remediation for discrimination, bias o Reducing endowment effects ▯ ▯ The Case of Equality John Rawls (1921-2002) o Veil of ignorance o Difference principle ▯ ▯ Rawls on inequality Are you entitled to the benefits of your talent and hard work? Do high achievers owe a debt to society for their success? ▯ ▯
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'