Why do I hate Con Law so Much?

[midnight thursday]

Dear God I hate Con Law. I can't even bring myself to read the book. What is wrong with me? This stuff should be interesting. Somebody please tell me it's going to get better.

I just don't get it. What are people arguing about? This stuff is over 200 years old. It there some special "frame of mind" that I need to have before I go to class.


If it's never going to better, then could someone please recommend a good supplement.

[Texas]

If it's never going to better, then could someone please recommend a good supplement.

kava kava

[midnight thursday]

Kava Kava? Somehow, that makes me feel worse. Every other class this semester is great. This one class is going to drive my crazy. That's what I'm supposed to be reading for right now.

[BigPimpinBU]

the way these things work usually, is that if there is a class you hate, everyone else hates it too. maybe your professor sucks, but con law is definitely "unique" as far as 1L classes go. i felt the same way about civ pro last year. when you hate a class, you have to make a conscious effort to work that much harder, because it wont come naturally. i wish there was a simple answer, but you just gotta grab yourself by the balls, and force yourself to work.

as far as supplements go, far and away, the best one is by erwin chemerinsky. its expensive, but it'll get you through any 1st amdt class you end up taking, (i doubt u will though), and is pretty useful if you ever get the urge to read about roe v wade or something, (u probably wont, again). anyway - its a good one. and good luck.

[jacy85]

I hate Con law too...it's not just you.  I'm hoping it will pick up a little when we start discuss issues that are more applicable to current events and issues.

[Coregram]

I think the proper frame of mind (at least the one I had) is that the course isn't really about "what the law is" as much as it is about "who gets to make the law."  That's why cases that are 200 years old, such as Marbury v. Madison, are still good law and important and relevant even today.

I think of it this way: there are 5 potential parties with conflicting powers or rights.  Federal Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, the States, and Individuals with rights protected under the various amendments.   The cases, no matter what the underlying law in question is, almost always is really dealing with resolving the conflict between at least 2 of those parties about who, if anyone, can make the underlying law.   The court then generally develops tests and analysis to resolve the conflict.  These are what you can then apply to hypos or test questions.

It does seem a bit more alive when the underlying laws are issues you can relate to today. 

[Goldy]

I am enjoying Con Law II more than I did Con Law I. Maybe because we are tackling issues like racial discrimination and freedom of speech more this semester

[Bobo]

I agree that it is mostly the initial stuff that is really dry and that it should get better as the semester goes on.

I also think that a lot of it has to do with delivery.  We probably get more lecture (vs. discussion) in Con Law than I have had in any other class in law school.  Fortunately for me my professor is an interesting guy, and really acts things out, brings it to life, etc.  Otherwise, I think I would be sound asleep.

[qaz123]

you hate it because it is the most f-ing boring class ever.

[artgirl]

I'm with you! I hate hate conlaw. It doesn't help that the prof is like 100 years old and doesn't do anything but tell random stories in class that have nothing to do with the reading.