Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights

Course No. 8530
Professor John E. Finn, Ph.D.
Wesleyan University
Share This Course
4.5 out of 5
78 Reviews
71% of reviewers would recommend this product
Course No. 8530
Audio Streaming Included Free

Course Overview

The civil liberties and constitutional rights our nation's citizens possess—not only in theory, but in the courtroom, where the state can be forced to honor those liberties—are a uniquely American invention. And when we were taught history and learned about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, we were always made aware of that uniqueness, of the extraordinary experiment that gave every citizen of this new nation a gift possessed by no others. But what, exactly, was that gift?

What liberties and rights did the Founders intend us to have? How do we get from what Professor John Finn calls the Constitution's "wonderfully elastic and vague" language to the finely tuned specifics of the Supreme Court's decisions about speech, or abortion, or religion?

And what is religion? In forbidding Congress to make any law "respecting an establishment" of religion, or "prohibiting the free exercise" of it, the Founders neglected to define it. The answer is more complicated than it seems.

In fact, as Professor Finn shows in Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights, almost everything about the Constitution, no matter how unwavering its words might appear, is more complicated than it seems at first reading, leaving a legacy of questions that multiplies with each passing decade.

Why have generations of jurists and legal scholars—not to mention legislators, presidents, and citizens—argued so long and hard about the meaning of what often appears to be unambiguous phrasing? How is it that several differing Supreme Court opinions—even those on diametrically opposed sides of a sharply disputed case—can so often all seem plausible? And how has so remarkably sparse a document as the Constitution nevertheless proven to be so complex a vision of what an ideal polity should be?

A Look at Law as It Relates to Fundamental Questions

In addressing such questions, Professor Finn is interested in far more than law. He emphasizes that this series of lectures, based on Supreme Court opinions from dozens of the Court's most important landmark decisions, is not a law course where you memorize specific legal tests and principles.

Instead, it has as its subject, says Professor Finn, "the relationship of law to the most fundamental sorts of questions about politics, morality, and human nature."

Thus, as the lectures examine the legal evolution of specific liberties and rights:

  • Due process and privacy
  • Jurisprudence about the death penalty
  • Freedom of speech and of religion
  • Equal protection
  • Habeas corpus.

"There is always a broad theoretical context to consider. We want to know "the overall conception of liberties, rights, and governmental powers that most nearly reflects and promotes our best understanding of the Constitution and the polity it both constitutes and envisions."

In striving to convey that understanding, Professor Finn encourages us to see that "most of the serious difficulties (and there are many) in the politics of civil liberties arise from conflicts between our commitments to two or more positive values," or, as Justice Felix Frankfurter once wrote, "What the Greeks thousands of years ago recognized as a tragic issue, namely, the clash of rights, not the clash of wrongs."

Or, expressed in more practical terms, we live under a Constitution whose meaning is never self-evident, so that, as Professor Finn notes, "There is usually more than one way to understand a constitutional provision, usually more than one way to decide a case," with "few, if any, uncontested principles or issues or questions in the American constitutional order."

Balancing Vital Tensions

Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights explores the tensions that make up that order—tensions, say, between our commitment to self-governance, expressed through majority rule and the other democratic principles, and our simultaneous commitment to constitutionalism and the Bill of Rights, expressed by the need to keep the majority from acting in ways that trample on liberty.

By emphasizing ongoing efforts to grapple with broad philosophical principles that the Founders sought to build into the language of the Constitution, this course provides an ideal complement to the more chronological and descriptive approach offered by The History of the Supreme Court. At the same time, it also complements the perspectives emphasized by our courses in philosophy and intellectual history that examine the more purely theoretical underpinnings of the American experiment. For in focusing on the written opinions of the Court's members—which are illuminating whether written for the majority, in dissent, or to offer alternative reasons for concurring with a final decision—these lectures directly engage the approach taken by the Court as it has sought not only to understand the language and principles of the Constitution, but also to shape them into the working laws of the land.

Although Professor Finn covers many of the most famous landmark decisions that also appear in The History of the Supreme Court, his course is organized into broad themes, and his method is markedly different. Taking a "liberal arts approach," Professor Finn looks at constitutional issues from the perspective of their foundations in social, moral, and political theory, thereby addressing "questions about the meaning of justice, questions about the meaning of equality, and questions about the meaning of America itself."

A Chance to See the Evolution of Principles

An example of Professor Finn's ability to reveal the law's evolutionary processes at work comes during his discussion of the famous 1965 decision in Griswold v. Connecticut, when the Court first recognized an explicit constitutional right to privacy.

Professor Finn explains how that idea had first been set forth in an article—coauthored by Boston lawyer Louis Brandeis—in the Harvard Law Review in 1898. Thirty years later—now sitting on the Supreme Court—Justice Brandeis raised the issue again. But he was raising it in a famous dissent from the majority opinion, and it would take 35 more years before another majority opinion, written by Justice William O. Douglas, would finally indicate the Court's agreement: The Constitution does indeed include, even if not explicitly, a right to privacy—though the Court could not agree on what privacy means.

As an interesting sidelight, Professor Finn notes that the statute against birth control overturned by Griswold had been placed on the books more than 100 years earlier—enacted as one of the very first of the antipornography, antiobscenity laws.

Professor Finn's discussion of the Griswold ruling, and the long legal gestation of its underlying principle, exemplifies the teaching skills that have been honored repeatedly. Also apparent are his passion for his subject and his ability to convey even the subtlest nuances of the legal and philosophical evolution of issues such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, school prayer, privacy, equality, reproductive rights, affirmative action, and so much more.

And as you might expect from such difficult issues, this is a course filled with nuance—each side of so many constitutional issues can be presented plausibly. Though none of us will agree with every decision of the Court or the constitutional interpretations on which they are constructed, it is extraordinary to experience, so directly, from throughout our history, in the carefully constructed language of the nation's leading judges, the deliberate flexibility and ambiguity that so often make even opposing opinions defensible. Indeed, this is among our Constitution's very greatest strengths.

Hide Full Description
36 lectures
 |  Average 30 minutes each
  • 1
    What Are Civil Liberties?
    In introducing students to the overall themes of the course and the methods and materials that will be used, we begin by noting that there is no easy or single answer to the misleadingly simple question, "What are civil liberties?" x
  • 2
    The Bill of Rights—An Overview
    The first constitutional document produced by the Philadelphia Convention did not include a bill of rights. We explore the history of the Bill of Rights, beginning with whether and why it was necessary and why it took the form that it did. x
  • 3
    Two Types of Liberty—Positive and Negative
    This lecture focuses primarily on one Supreme Court case and what it teaches about two issues concerning the breadth and scope of the Bill of Rights: the "state action doctrine" and the nature of the rights included in the Constitution. x
  • 4
    The Court and Constitutional Interpretation
    After a brief history of the Court's early years, we take up important institutional issues, including how justices are appointed; the nature and limits of judicial power; how the Court actually decides cases; and the question of when, if ever, the Court should refrain from deciding a case. x
  • 5
    Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review
    This lecture introduces students to the practice of judicial review—the authority of the Supreme Court and other federal courts to declare some governmental action unconstitutional—on some accounts, the cornerstone of American constitutional order. x
  • 6
    Private Property and the Founding
    One of the Constitution's central purposes, according to the Preamble, is to secure the "Blessings of Liberty." There is little doubt, as we shall see in this lecture, that chief among those liberties at the founding was the right to own private property. x
  • 7
    Lochner v. New York and Economic Due Process
    The Court's protection for private property has waxed and waned. This lecture traces that process from its beginnings through the 20th century, and includes a close look at one of the Court's most infamous decisions. x
  • 8
    The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment
    Following the Court's rejection of economic due process, the right to property became substantially less important than it once was. However, a few cases arising under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause suggest that the right to property may be more robust than it has seemed over the last few decades. x
  • 9
    Fundamental Rights—Privacy and Personhood
    We continue our examination of the relationship between liberty and community, broadening our focus to include the development of the constitutional right to privacy. x
  • 10
    Privacy—Early Cases
    Though there is no explicit provision in the Constitution that grants a comprehensive right to privacy, concern for privacy does appear in several places, including the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and other aspects of privacy intersect with the First Amendment's freedom of association. x
  • 11
    Roe v. Wade and Reproductive Autonomy
    Few topics in American law are as emotionally charged, and as doctrinally confused, as the discussion of abortion rights, encompassing not only the law, but also profound moral and political issues, and important questions about the role of the Supreme Court in American society. x
  • 12
    Privacy and Autonomy—From Roe to Casey
    We continue our examination of the consequences of Roe by exploring subsequent litigation, including the most recent cases involving abortion and reproductive autonomy, which have highlighted the issues of judicial power and accountability. x
  • 13
    Other Privacy Interests—Family
    As we have seen, the right to liberty is less a single right than a collection of diverse interests. The same is true of the right to privacy, an umbrella that covers a wide collection of more specific interests, including procreation, abortion, marriage, and sexuality. x
  • 14
    Other Privacy Interests—Sexuality
    Does the Constitution protect the choices we make about sexuality? Few areas of life, it might seem, are as private, but most societies also recognize a collective interest in regulating certain kinds of sexual conduct. We explore several cases that try to define that interest. x
  • 15
    Same-Sex Marriages and the Constitution
    Does the Constitution protect same-sex marriages? No decision by the Supreme Court has addressed this question directly, but we look at several cases that might be relevant to the issue. x
  • 16
    The Right to Die and the Constitution
    Few issues in civil liberties are as controversial as the question of whether the Constitution includes a right to die. We explore several cases that illustrate, in examining this question, how the most fundamental questions in civil liberties are not so much legal as moral. x
  • 17
    Cruel and Unusual? The Death Penalty
    The past few lectures have opened up questions that consider the relationship between self and society, between rights and responsibilities, and indeed about the meaning and definition of life itself. This lecture explores those issues in their most profound form: the death penalty. x
  • 18
    The First Amendment—An Overview
    From a few sparse words in the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has created a huge and complicated jurisprudence. In this lecture, we consider what the Founders may have meant when they sought to protect speech, as well as the equally important question of why they sought to protect speech. x
  • 19
    Internal Security and the First Amendment
    The reasons we protect speech are complex. This lecture explores whether there are times when we might not want to protect it, examining the depth of our commitment and asking who should balance the competing demands of the First Amendment and national security. x
  • 20
    Symbolic Speech and Expressive Conduct
    We begin four lectures that take up thorny questions about the meaning of speech and expression, the scope of the First Amendment's protections, and what we might choose to leave unprotected because it is not "really" speech. x
  • 21
    Indecency and Obscenity
    In several of our lectures we have wrestled with a problem of definition: What is speech? What isn't? In this lecture and the next we take up two different versions of this problem. In this lecture: Is pornography speech? x
  • 22
    Hate Speech and Fighting Words
    We examine the suppression of "hate speech" and the regulation of so-called "fighting words"—the debate over both highlights the tension between our commitment to freedom of expression and our collective interest in protecting values such as civility, social morality, and public order. x
  • 23
    The Right to Silence
    Does freedom of speech include the right not to speak? To refuse, for example, to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, or to tape over the state motto on an automobile license plate? We consider several cases. x
  • 24
    Why Is Freedom of Religion So Complex?
    The relationship between matters of the soul and matters of state is a subject of intense controversy in the United States. In this lecture we begin an extended inquiry into freedom of religion. x
  • 25
    School Prayer and the Establishment Clause
    This lecture considers several cases illustrating two drives once observed by Justice Wiley Blount Rutledge to be "constantly in motion to abridge, in the name of education, the complete division of religion and civil authority." x
  • 26
    Religion—Strict Separation or Accommodation?
    We examine another, perhaps larger, issue that has troubled the Court in recent years: Does the establishment clause require government neutrality toward all forms of religious belief and nonbelief, or does it simply prohibit the government from favoring one religion over another? x
  • 27
    The Free Exercise Clause—Acting on Beliefs
    Holding to a particular religious belief is one thing. Acting on that belief, however, can mean colliding with the rights of others or of the community. At what point should the community's interest in public order restrict an individual's right to free exercise? x
  • 28
    Free Exercisee and “the Peyote Case”
    This lecture examines whether a claim of free exercise can excuse some individuals—simply because they are acting in accordance with their religion—from the application of religiously "neutral" laws that would otherwise prohibit that action. x
  • 29
    Two Religion Clauses—One Definition?
    In a great many cases, the religion clauses work in tandem to secure religious freedom. In some cases, however, they appear to be at odds. We examine two illustrative cases. x
  • 30
    Slavery and Dred Scott to Equal Protection
    Equality has always been one of the basic ideals of the American constitutional order. The original text of the Constitution, however, did not completely reflect this ideal. This lecture examines the Court's treatment of racial discrimination from the Founding to the important case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. x
  • 31
    Brown v. Board of Education
    This lecture explores the NAACP's systematic campaign for school desegregation—led by lead attorney Thurgood Marshall—that culminated in one of the Court's most historic rulings. x
  • 32
    Equality and Affirmative Action
    Does the remedial or benign purpose of affirmative action policies suggest the need for a special judicial test under the equal protection clause? This lecture explores how the Court has answered this question several times and in several ways. x
  • 33
    Equality and Gender Discrimination
    The ideal of equality is deeply rooted in our constitutional culture, even if we frequently fail to live up to it. In this lecture we take up one such area—that of discrimination on the basis of gender. x
  • 34
    Gender Discrimination as Semi-Suspect
    The Court has been unable to identify a clear standard of review that should govern gender classifications. We examine the decisions that have produced the Supreme Court's current test for the constitutionality of gender classification, which demands more than simple rationality but less than strict scrutiny. x
  • 35
    The Future of Equal Protection?
    We see the Court's continuing reluctance to use the strict scrutiny standard in a variety of equal protection cases. And we also observe a clear preference—except for cases involving race or gender—to defer to the democratic process. x
  • 36
    Citizens and Civil Liberties
    What overall conception of liberties, rights, and governmental powers most nearly reflects and promotes our best understanding of the Constitution? The final lecture examines how successful we have been in discovering an answer. x

Lecture Titles

Clone Content from Your Professor tab

What's Included

What Does Each Format Include?

Video DVD
Instant Audio Includes:
  • Download 36 audio lectures to your computer or mobile app
  • Downloadable PDF of the course guidebook
  • FREE audio streaming of the course from our website and mobile apps
Video DVD
DVD Includes:
  • 36 lectures on 6 DVDs
  • 280-page printed course guidebook
  • Downloadable PDF of the course guidebook

What Does The Course Guidebook Include?

Video DVD
Course Guidebook Details:
  • 280-page printed course guidebook
  • Suggested readings
  • Questions to consider
  • Timeline

Enjoy This Course On-the-Go with Our Mobile Apps!*

  • App store App store iPhone + iPad
  • Google Play Google Play Android Devices
  • Kindle Fire Kindle Fire Kindle Fire Tablet + Firephone
*Courses can be streamed from anywhere you have an internet connection. Standard carrier data rates may apply in areas that do not have wifi connections pursuant to your carrier contract.

Your professor

John E. Finn

About Your Professor

John E. Finn, Ph.D.
Wesleyan University
John E. Finn is Professor of Government Emeritus at Wesleyan University, where he taught for thirty years. Finn received a Ph.D. in political science from Princeton University, a J.D. from Georgetown University, a B.A. in political science from Nasson College, and a degree in culinary arts from the French Culinary Institute. His scholarly research and teaching focuses on constitutional theory, comparative constitutional...
Learn More About This Professor
Also By This Professor

Reviews

Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights is rated 4.4 out of 5 by 78.
Rated 5 out of 5 by from The Constitution & Civil Rights With so much discussion on The Constitution & Civil Rights, I wanted to get a deeper understanding of its real meaning and how it works. This course provided both of those
Date published: 2018-09-03
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Great delivery At first, I thought the lecture format too dull. Instead, the information is so riveting and delivered by a lecturer who values the law that I became engrossed easily.
Date published: 2018-07-21
Rated 5 out of 5 by from I AM AN ATTORNEY AN A FORMER PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, AND I FOUND THESE LECTURES TO BE INCISIVE, SCHOLARLY, WELL-PRESENTED, AND VERY INFORMATIVE.
Date published: 2018-07-14
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights -A timely c Experiencing problems with DVD player, hence have not yet viewed course
Date published: 2018-06-21
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Complexity revealed Reading the bill of rights, one might think it's all straightforward, but this course shows how complex it can really be. I came away with a much better understanding of are rights under the constitution, and how the Supreme Court reaches its decisions, and what its role in government really is.
Date published: 2018-01-07
Rated 5 out of 5 by from great gift for your favorite political junkie Bought this as a gift for a friend who did not read my law books but pontificates on Constitution. This will certainly enlighten anyone who thinks they know the interpretation of the Bill of Rights.
Date published: 2017-12-30
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Great course Purchase of this course was the audio version was able to listen at work . The course was clear and enunciated well . subject matter and delivery well executed .
Date published: 2017-12-02
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Terrific analysis Very interesting with lots of little known facts about the constitution I bought the other Course about the First Amendment because I enjoyed this one so much.
Date published: 2017-10-03
Rated 1 out of 5 by from Civil Liberties This will not download for down streaming! What can you suggest?
Date published: 2017-09-14
Rated 5 out of 5 by from A MUST This is one of the best courses of The Great Courses. Not only it is very informitive, it helps realizing how complicated the affairs of your every lives could be and how hard has the Supreme Court have worked to secure your rights.
Date published: 2017-08-08
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Civil Liberties and Bill of Rights Professor and content excellent. Somewhat disappointed that I was really focused on the first amendment, not the entire Bill of Rights. I learned a lot and wished that there had been more.
Date published: 2017-06-29
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Good presentation but not enough information given about the subject cases discussed. There seems to be an assumption that we, the audience, are familiar with the case details and have a copy of it in front of us.
Date published: 2017-04-10
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Outstanding course I'm really satisfied with the course. It is equivalent to sitting in a college classroom
Date published: 2017-03-03
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Brilliant Presentation Professor John Finn has done a masterful job presenting a complex subject in clear and understandable terms. This is the best course that I have ever taken from the Teaching Company.
Date published: 2017-02-17
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Recommeded This is an excellent course. I like the DVD because it keeps my interest better than just the audio. This course really makes one think. It is not a course that just gives answers, it is a course that makes you think what you would have done.
Date published: 2016-08-09
Rated 3 out of 5 by from Disappointing I love this topic but was disappointed in the course. The Bill of Rights is a central part of American history, and its understanding and application over time have changed in fascinating ways. The course was much less interesting than various books I have read on the subject. The teacher goes on endlessly about rather unimportant matters - for example, fine distinctions that might amuse a law student, but are not important for understanding even subtleties of the cases or decisions in question. I came away with the feeling that he dropped important topics, or brushed over significant issues, so he could dwell on minutiae.
Date published: 2016-06-18
Rated 4 out of 5 by from So what did our Founding Fathers really mean? Oh, where to start. I almost didn't. in the very first lecture Professor Finn stated that he would spend "several lectures" on this and "several lectures on that. Almost scared me off. He broke down his topics by property rights, privacy rights and equal protection. I was driving a long distance and I guess I was just too lazy to dig out another course, so I stuck with this one. And in the end, I was glad I stuck with this course. Many other reviewers have commented on the flawed nature of the Supreme Court so I won't go over that but to say I agree with that diagnosis. And since the Bill of RIghts is so vague much has been left to the justices interpretation of what the founding fathers meant and what the changing values of our population means today. Professor Finn does seem to go on and on about the issues but I took that to show the complexity of these issues. For example, when does your right to equal protection supersede my right to equal protection; when does your right to privacy supersede the right of the community to a safe and healthy environment.. I appreciated how Professor FInn made it clear that these cases come before the Supreme Court that involve people, real live people. Cases do not come to the court to test a philosophy even if they end up making judgements based on philosophy, or politics. Unfortunately this course was recorded in 2006 and does not follow the same s-x marriage issue to its latest conclusion. [Would you believe I could not have the word s_x in this review as it was considered profanity. Teaching Company, wake up.] I was expecting a discussion of the first 10 amendments to our Constitution. Not so. I particularly noticed the lack of discussion on the 2nd amendment. How did it get from "a well regulated militia" to today where everybody is allowed to carry a weapon? While this course had many holes in it, it does make you think about the complexity of the issues involved.
Date published: 2015-12-28
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights Placed court decisions in their historical contexts. Explained legal reasoning and sepparated critique of the reasoning of the decisions from the consequences of the decisions. Demonstrated the value of dissenting decisions in forming future decisions. Presentation style kept my attention. Deepened my understanding of US history and government. Loved it.
Date published: 2015-12-20
Rated 4 out of 5 by from According to the Supreme Court's Interpretations Prof Finn is very knowledge, of course, but I had trouble staying awake on many of these lectures. He has a monotone voice and the audio version would just "put me to sleep." Then again, I haven't formally studied the Constitution since high school, which was very long ago. I would recommend the casual listener to freshen-up on the Constitution before this course, going over the basic format and general ideas. I will try to do some prereq reading on this topic before repeating this course sometime in the future. I'm sure it will be better the next time. So what could a casual listener take away from this course? Well, as Prof Finn pointed out in Lecture 36 hone in during three controversial but famous cases: Lochner, Brown and Roe. Through just these few select cases one can see the the Supreme Court is not always perfect but can and do the right thing sometimes, and does not always shy away from being political.
Date published: 2015-07-08
Rated 3 out of 5 by from Dr Finn strives to be neutral Dr Finn regularly references Justice Scalia opinions. I would not be surprised to learn from the frequency of Scalia opinions being quoted that Justice Scalia is actually Dr Finn's favorite Justice. Dr Finn praises Justice Thomas' stance on the court. Dr Finn refers to intact dilation and extractions by the pejorative slang term 'partial birth abortions', Dr Finn believes the Court ruled wrongly in Roe v Wade. As a comparatively novice to the topics in the lectures, I am unable to judge how the professor's political leaning may influence his interpretations and presentation of the Constitution. But I am left questioning how a different professor would present the same material.
Date published: 2015-06-08
Rated 5 out of 5 by from awesome This is an incredible course, so packed with information that I know I will watch it again. Dr. Finn thoroughly covers the case law related to key civil liberties and the evolution of the Supreme Court’s thinking. Dr. Finn’s knowledge and enthusiasm are vast, his analysis balanced. I love his assertion that, despite the doctrine of judicial review, the Supreme Court is not solely responsible for interpreting the Constitution. I would like to believe that that is true, and I would like to know how to make my own voice heard. Merely voting feels insufficient. This course might benefit from a different title. Not every civil liberty in the Bill of Rights is discussed; in fact, the Bill of Rights isn't really discussed, once Dr. Finn notes that "civil liberties" are the civil rights included in the Bill of Rights. I am now taking Dr. Finn's great course about the First Amendment. I highly recommend both that course and this one.
Date published: 2015-03-05
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Challenging and a bit scary A study of the Bill of Rights could be a dry review of cases and legal doctrines. This course was decidedly not that way. Professor John E. Finn related the issues surrounding civil liberties to much broader philosophical, political, and social concerns. He carefully described the nuances of the issues and the implications of court decisions. This is not a course to be taken casually. You cannot do it justice if you merely listen to it in the car while driving to work. It requires constant thought and review and undivided attention. After completing this course, I realize that our civil liberties are really not very well protected. They are subject to the whims and personal values of judges. Judges make mistakes - sometimes big ones. These controversies are not simple. They routinely involve a clash of positive dearly held values. Judges can invoke any number of principles or doctrines in order to support whatever outcome they might personally desire. It is up to all of us as citizens to remain vigilant and true to our values of human dignity and freedom. This includes educating ourselves on matters of self-government using materials such as this course. The only problem I had was that I got bogged down in the first third of the lectures because those issues seemed remote and of lesser interest to me. But they are nevertheless important because Finn uses them to establish concepts that are needed to fully appreciate the import of later topics. There is much to learn here and much to understand. It is a challenging and excellent course.
Date published: 2015-02-19
Rated 3 out of 5 by from The Professor talked in a very mundain voice, that made it difficult to remain alert and attentive.
Date published: 2014-11-24
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Scary how they are swayed by the political winds. It was fascinating to learn how the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and Bill of Rights and scary how they are swayed by the political winds. I was taught that the Constitution was a living document meant to adapt and change with time. Our legal system has taken this to the extremes and made a mess of what the Founding Fathers intended. Not a big fan of presenter, at times very confusing as to what case he is talking about.
Date published: 2014-06-12
Rated 5 out of 5 by from The content of the course is interesting, and is well presented by Professor Finn. It was striking, surprising, and a bit frightening to understand how profound decisions in constitutional judgment could be so deeply affected by personal preferences and beliefs of judges - real people. Another very interesting point was that the court itself decides how it should function, which cases it should take. On occasion, it seemed that the material is getting a bit too fine grained for the casual listener - hence the 4 stars on content.
Date published: 2013-10-26
Rated 5 out of 5 by from A Real Can of Worms! It took me a few lectures to really get into this course, but once there I found it excellent. Professor Finn is obviously very knowledgable of constitutional law and was thorough in his presentation (focusing on just a few essential parts of the Bill of Rights). Although he at times was verbose he also treated us listeners as capable and competent law students, and did so with a refreshingly unpredictable and multisided perspective. The result is I learned a lot and can no longer say I have faith in how the Constitution informs modern America, or how the Supreme Court functions within a balance of powers. This ambivalence is at least an informed view now, and reflects the ambivalence and contradictions in both the original document and in the court's rulings since. Surprisingly I was quite satisfied with discovering it is a mixed up and messy can of worms once it is opened up. And Professor Finn does an excellent job of opening it all up. I thought at first 36 lectures would be too long, but I can see now he could easily have doubled it.
Date published: 2013-10-23
Rated 4 out of 5 by from Why Constitutions Don't Protect Freedom This course was not an obvious choice for me, as I live in the UK and knew very little about the US constitution. However as a libertarian I am intrigued by the arguments of minarchism v anarcho-capitalism. I thought a course on the constitution and bill of rights of the "Land of the Free" might be interesting. My overwhelming impression at the end of the course was that the libertarian ideals of the founding fathers have been "Lochnerized" by the US Supreme Court to the point where they are a nothing but a pale shadow of what was intended. Professor Finn tries valiantly to weave some logic into the capricious rulings, but ultimately fails. Not because of lack of rigour, but because no logical structure can accommodate mutually exclusive positions. An amazing lesson in how the state will do whatever it wants, regardless of any form of written constitution.
Date published: 2013-10-18
Rated 5 out of 5 by from You must take this course This is my second time listening to this course. I enjoyed the first pass thru the course but felt it was so rich in information a second listen would be rewarding. It certainly is. As a person with no legal training I find this course provides a stimulating introduction to constitutional law and the deliberations of the Supreme Court. Professor Finn has a nice sense of humor and his pacing allows your brain sufficient time to absorb what he has just said. I must say this is a course thick with ideas new to me. But now Supreme Court decisions make more sense. I see clearly the Supreme Court is a necessary but flawed institution. Nine unelected judges have enormous power to nullify federal and state law. It's truly chilling to learn that some decisions arise from the judges' personal beliefs and preferences rather than from the wording of the constitution. But somehow our messy system of government just works. Bad court decisions are eventually overturned and we move on. As Professor Finn laments, knowledge of the constitution is lacking in most Americans. This course is a sure fire remedy. Highly recommended.
Date published: 2013-09-07
Rated 4 out of 5 by from This course will make you think! If you are looking for a course that, in addition to enlightening, makes you think, this is it! It causes you to think about what it means to be an American. I would suggest listening to Lecture 36 (the last one) first. The Constitution and many of its amendments are purposefully vague. The documents convey a framework and let citizens, legislators, the executive branch, and judiciary work out specifics. In practice, what does free speech and religious freedom really enable us to do or preclude us from doing? Except for the fourth amendment’s prohibition against reasonable searches, there are no references to “privacy.” What then, in practice, does “privacy” mean? Professor Finn helps you understand how our legal system reconciles our continuous struggle to balance individual liberties with community needs and how it evolves with changing morality such as our attitude toward slavery. He explains that the Supreme Court is usually determining which of two valid rights is more important than which action is correct and which is wrong. You must be comfortable with nuance to enjoy this course. The Court uses four adjectives - fundamental (rights), compelling (reasons), rational (reasoning) and suspect (discrimination criteria). What does each of these adjectives mean? Their explanation and use can be frustrating. The course’s most challenging communication issue results from the legislative preference for the “not” format. The list of things we are not permitted to do is far shorter than the list of actions we are allowed so laws are predominately worded “One shall not…” When the Court disagrees with a law in this format it must use the double negative i.e. “the Court invalidated the prohibition of…………” Two of the following words: not, unconstitutional, invalidate, prohibit, proscribe, incorrect, misunderstood, disapprove, inappropriate, and illegitimate are frequently used in the same sentence causing me to push “pause” and think “Now what did they say the party could do?” Similarly, I wish Professor Finn would tell us what he does mean, rather than what he doesn’t mean e.g. “I don’t believe and I’m not suggesting…. I mean nothing of the sort.” After listening to the last lecture and reviewing the book, I immediately restarted the course from the beginning. I needed the first pass to become comfortable with the aforementioned issues. Overall, it was very good and caused me to evaluate issues I never had contemplated.
Date published: 2013-06-17
Rated 5 out of 5 by from Passionate Speaker Makes the content enjoyable and makes you feel very involved. Brings out ideas/concepts about Supreme Court decisions that make the topic come alive.
Date published: 2013-06-11
  • y_2019, m_8, d_20, h_11
  • bvseo_bulk, prod_bvrr, vn_bulk_2.0.13
  • cp_2, bvpage2n
  • co_hasreviews, tv_2, tr_76
  • loc_en_US, sid_8530, prod, sort_[SortEntry(order=SUBMISSION_TIME, direction=DESCENDING)]
  • clientName_teachco
  • bvseo_sdk, p_sdk, 3.2.0
  • CLOUD, getContent, 89.38ms
  • REVIEWS, PRODUCT

Questions & Answers

Customers Who Bought This Course Also Bought

Buy together as a Set
and
Save
Choose a Set Format
$399.90
$749.90