There should be a brief introduction, with a Part I that provides summary of the facts and proceedings in the district court and court of appeals, and a statement of the question presented.
Part II, you should state the holding and then provide reasoning. The holding will state whether or not the Due Process Clause (and, if you wish, the Equal Protection Clause) requires states to provide access to a basic minimum education. (You may choose to address only the DPC, or both the DPC and the EPC.) Having stated the holding, you will go on in Part II to explain how you reach this result. You will cite the case or cases you rely on for precedent and explain why they support the holding. And while you need not expressly identify the principle(s) of constitutional interpretation on which you rely, you should be conscious of the principles on which you rely.
In Part III, you will identify what you consider the strongest argument that the other side has made, and then explain why, despite its force, that argument ultimately is not persuasive to you. Again, you should cite cases to ground your discussion. If you have not already, in Part II, discussed a new case (one we did not read as a class), then you should discuss that case here.
In Part IV, you should apply your holding to the facts as alleged in the complaint. Your opinion should end with a short conclusion and a disposition either affirming or reversing the decision of the court of appeals.
Additional information is in the attachment (as well as a list of cases studied in class and the accepted new cases).
Feel free to message me for any clarification! Thank you so much for helping me with this, I really appreciate all of your time and effort 🙂
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]