LAW AND THE POLICY PROCESS: PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5302

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

SCHOOL OF ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND POLICY SCIENCES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

FALL 2008
TUESDAYS 7:00 – 9:45 P.M.
WSTC 1.302

Instructor: Stephanie Newbold, Ph.D.

Email: stephanie.newbold@utdallas.edu
Phone: 972.883.5341
Office: Westec 1.212
Office Hours: Before Class & By Appointment

INTRODUCTION:

The purpose of this course is to introduce students to how the legal environment of public
affairs influences the public policy process. Together, we will examine how the judiciary
struggles to shape the administrative state in its own image. In doing so, we will study
the core components of administrative law; the institutional and administrative use and
misuse of executive orders; and the constitutional principles that govern the decision-
making processes of public managers and the actions and operations of public sector
agencies.

REQUIRED TEXTS:

Breyer, Stephen. 2005. Active Liberty: Interpreting our Democratic Constitution.

New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Cooper, Phillip J. 2002. By Order of the President: The Use and Abuse of Executive
Direct Action. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

Lee, Yong S. with David H. Rosenbloom. 2005. A Reasonable Public Servant:

Constitutional Foundations of Administrative Conduct in the United States.
Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Rosenbloom, David H. 2003. Administrative Law for Public Managers. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Selected Federal and Supreme Court cases, which students can find on-line at
www.findlaw.com, www.lexisnexus.com, or www.westlaw.com.

COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:

By the end of this course, students will be able to:

• Develop an institutional and intellectual understanding for how the legal environment
of public affairs affects public sector management at all levels of government;

• Identify and explain the core elements of administrative law;

• Discuss and analyze how the judiciary influences the legal dynamics of the
administrative state and the nation’s democratic institutions and;

• Improve analytical thinking, writing quality, electronic researching skills, and oral
presentation skills.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS:

Case Analysis:
Students are required to analyze and contrast two important United States Supreme Court
cases, Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) with Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319
(1976), which provide a formative example of how the Court can narrow its own
precedent when determining what rights are protected under the Due Process Clause of
the 5th and 14th Amendments. In order to complete this assignment successfully, students
must explain the situational environment of each case, the constitutional question(s) the
Court examined in each, how the Court came to their affirming and dissenting opinions;
and the implications of each case on the American administrative state.

Group Presentation:
Group projects and presentations are excellent ways for students to learn outside the
classroom, to educate and learn from their peers on a particular subject matter, and to
build teamwork skills, particularly as they relate to assuming and delegating authority
and responsibility. For this course, students will form groups, no larger than three
members, and select a Supreme Court case from the Roberts Court (September 2005 –
present) of their choosing to present to the class. The presentation should cover the
background history of the case, the constitutional question(s) it raises for the Court; the
key arguments for each position; how the Court ruled; why the Justices came to their
respective decisions; and what are the strengths and weaknesses of the affirming and
dissenting opinions.

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 2

As a matter of organization, students are free to form their own groups and select their
own cases. No group can examine the same case. A list of group participants and the
cases being analyzed is due to the professor no later than the third class.

Review of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer’s Active Liberty:

Students are to write a reaction to Justice Stephen Breyer’s work Active Liberty. This
analysis should be no less than ten (10) typed, double-spaced pages. For this assignment,
the expectation is that students not only underscore the major tenets of Breyer’s argument
but that they connect important themes discussed during this course to his final
assessment.

Final Examination:
There will be a take home final examination. Students will be given six essay questions
and will be responsible for answering at least three. The examination, in total, should be
approximately ten pages in length.

Class Attendance and Participation:

Students are expected to attend class on time, participate in discussions, and complete all
assigned readings on the date in which they are due. If you cannot attend class, please
inform the instructor as soon as possible. Excessive absences and lack of participation
will affect your grade negatively.

Writing Expectations:
All written work submitted for this course must be typed and double-spaced. Correct
English, grammar, spelling, and punctuation is expected. Papers that do not meet this
expectation will be penalized; the worse the grammatical infraction(s) the more steep the
penalty. Graphs, charts, bullets, etc. should not be used for any of the assignments
submitted for this course. Students should write only in complete sentences. Please
remember that formal paragraphs consist of three or more complete sentences. All
written work should follow the Turabian format, should be submitted with a title page,
and paginated.

Extensions and Special Exceptions for Assigned Work:

Students are expected to submit work on time. Unless prior arrangements are made with
the instructor, work submitted after the due date will be penalized one letter grade for
each day late, including weekends. Emailed assignments will not be accepted unless the
student has made prior arrangements with the professor before the assignment is due.

Students with Disabilities:

Students classified as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act should advise
the professor of their condition, no later than the second class, so appropriate
accommodations can be made.

Academic Integrity:
Students are expected to uphold the University honor code at all times.

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 3

General Disclaimers:
(1) The professor can amend the course syllabus at any time. If necessary, the professor
will announce and discuss these changes in class.

(2) Tape recorders are not permitted.

GRADING:

The evaluation for this course is based on the following percentages:

Case Analysis: 25%

Group Presentation: 20%
Breyer Review: 15%
Final Examination: 30%
Class Participation: 10%

COURSE CALENDAR:

Class I Course Introduction

August 26th
-Review of the Syllabus and Course Expectations

-Historical Overview of Administrative Law in the United States

-Video

Class II Why the Past is Important – Providing a Historical Foundation

September 2nd for Public Law in the United States

-Rosenbloom, Chapter 2:
The Constitutional Context of U.S. Public Administration

-Lee, Chapter 1:
The Constitution and a Reasonable Public Servant

-Cooper, Chapter 1
The Tools of Presidential Direct Administration

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 4

Class III The Anatomy of an Administrative Law Case
September 9th
-Rosenbloom, Chapter 1:
What is Administrative Law?

-FDA v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation, 120 S. Ct.

1291 (2000)

-Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 27 S. Ct.
350 (1907)

-DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services,

489 U.S. 189 (1989)

Class IV Rulemaking I
September 16th
-Rosenbloom, Chapter 3:
Administrative Rulemaking

-Administrative Procedure Act, pay particular attention to Sections

553 & 556-557

Class V Rulemaking II
September 23rd
-Chocolate Manufacturers Association of the United States v.
Block, 755 F2nd 1098 (1985)

-U.S. et al. v. Florida East Railway Co. et al., 410 U.S. 224 (1973)

-Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation v. Natural

Resources Defense Council, 98 S. Ct. 1197 (1978)

-Hoctor v. United States Department of Agriculture, 82 F3rd 165,

7th Circuit (1996)

Class VI Adjudication I
September 30th
-Rosenbloom, Chapter 4:
Evidentiary Adjudication and Enforcement

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 5

Class VII Adjudication II
October 7th
-Londoner v. Denver, 210 U.S. 373 (1908)

-Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 239

U.S. 441 (1915)

-Richardson v. Wright, 405 U.S. 208 (1972)

-City of West Chicago v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 701 F2d

632 (1983)

Class VIII Judicial Review I

October 14th
-Rosenbloom, Chapter 6:
Judicial and Legislative Review of Administrative Action

Class IX Judicial Review II

October 21st
-Chevron, USA, Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 104 S.
Ct. 2778 (1984)
**Pay particular attention to Parts I, II, & VII**

-Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual

Automobile Insurance Company, 103 S Ct. 2856 (1983)

-Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)

-United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995)

-United States v. Mead, 121 S Ct. 2164 (2001)

-If necessary, a brief discussion of the case analysis assignment.

Class X Personnel Management

October 28th
-Lee, Chapters 4-11:
Part II: Constitutional Rights of a Public Servant
Part III: Civil Rights of a Public Servant
Part IV: Conclusion

**Case Analysis Due at the Beginning of Class**

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 6

Class XI Executive Orders & the American Public Policy Process
November 4th -Cooper, Chapters 2-6

Class XII Debating the Constitutionality of Legislative and Line Item

November 11th Vetoes

-Discuss Active Liberty

-Cooper, Chapters 7-8;

Presidential Signing Statements
Presidential Direct Action and Washington Rules

-Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, 103 S.Ct.

2764 (1983)

-Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)

**Breyer Analysis Due at the Beginning of Class**

Class XIII The Constitution and Civil Servants: A View from the Top
November 18th
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265
(1978)

Adarand Constructors v. Pena, 516 U.S. 200 (1995)

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)

Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003)

Class XIV -Group Presentations

November 25th

Class XV -Group Presentations

December 2nd
-Final Exam Distributed
Due by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Students are permitted to submit Final Exams electronically

PA/PSCI/POEC/SOC 5308 – Fall 2008 7