Reference no: EM133858791

Assignment: International Law

I. Was the hearing depicted in "The Response," a legal proceeding? Include the following issues in your answer.

1. Evaluate this question from the point of view of both Fuller and Raz.

2. Does the hearing's status as a legal proceeding, or not, have any moral consequences in terms of our obligation to respect the results? Explain why or why not.

3. Does the fact that the hearing will determine whether the subjects remain incarcerated have any bearing on whether it is a legal proceeding.

II. In Trump v. US, (linked) the Supreme Court ruled that the President has absolute immunity for actions taken within his core constitutional responsibilities and presumptive immunity to the very outer perimeter of his official acts. This decision completely changes the understanding of the Constitution held by conservative and liberal lawyers, judges and legal scholars. That is to say, almost everyone who ever graduated from law school understood that the president was not above the law. This notion was accepted by the Supreme Court in US v Nixon and his subsequent resignation and acceptance of a pardon from his successor. Get the instant assignment help.

Read the decision, linked above, and discuss whether the surprising decision in US v Trump was a result of the open texture of law (gaps), an interpretation of the overall principles implicit in American constitutional law or simply made up. Discuss this from the point of view of Hart and Dworkin. Were the judges exercising legal discretion in the manner Hart meant it? Were the judge acting as political theorists evaluating all prior decisions and looking for a consistent explanation that explains all the prior decisions and justifies them coherently? Explain whether you think this case was rightly decided using the two legal theorists to support your position.