National Security—Political science final paper
This is one group project, the topic for this final project is about National Security. Only need to write my own part, don’t need to write an introduction, since I am not assigned with that part. Choose some cases and write analysis about it. Each part write at least 3-4 pages, Total need to write 12 pages. word count at least 4400.
Here is what I am taking in this final project.
Part 1: National security: Were the decisions followed?
Do you think this issue area indicates vulnerabilities in American courts?
Part 2: National security: What does this tell us about adherence to the rule of law?
Next steps?
Part 3: Election hHacking
Were the decisions followed?
Do you think this issue area indicates vulnerabilities in American courts?
Here is this paper’s writing instruction:
You and your colleagues (the rest of your team members) have been commissioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee to evaluate vulnerabilities to the country’s faith in the American legal system. The concern among members of the Judiciary committee is that increasing attacks on the rule of law will eventually erode the power of the courts–posing risks for a just and ordered democracy. They fear, in particular, that current high-profile conflicts between courts, advocates and policy-makers will weaken the power of the courts, and therefore the stability of the rule of law, beyond repair.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has asked especially that you focus on one of three policy areas: national security in your assessment of the courts. However they are also interested in policy arenas that you have identified as especially problemmatic for these kinds of challenges to judicial legitimacy. In a 25-page paper, your team will focus on national security.
1. A brief overview of the role that courts played in the two policy arenas you are focusing on. This would include any salient court cases, settlements, attempted litigation–and any salient reactions to these court-focused events.
2. How different actors responded to any court interventions. Have decisions been followed, challenged, disergarded? Have they been accepted? Have they fostered progress? Have they promoted backlash? Describe any/all that apply to your specific issue.
3. Given your expertise, do you feel that these issue areas–and the specific interactions/interplay between court and non-court actors–indicate vulnerabilities for the American courts (a challenge to their legitimacy, their power to persuade) or do you believe that these policy conflicts exemplify an American judiciary that is standing strong, that will withstand any challenges it faces. Provide explanation, evidence of your assessment.
4. On the whole, what do these policy stories tell us about adherence to the rule of law–to the norm that court opinions/judicial actions should be followed, even when we don’t agree with them? What do you recommend as next steps for the Senate Judiciary Committee as they move forward with trying to protect the integrity of the American legal system?
5. Please make sure you include in your discussion/assessment any relevent course materials–including but not limited to items from lecture, readings from the course, court opinions, and other materials on skyepack.
