Discussion

1.The following clause was added to the Food and Drug Act:

“the Secretary [of the Food and Drug Administration] shall not approve for use in food any chemical additive found to induce cancer in man, or, after tests, found to induce cancer in animals.”

 After this clause was adopted, no new additives could be approved for use in food if they caused cancer in people or animals. 

 The public loved this and industry hated it. 

 What do you think of this clause?  Do you support it or do you oppose it?

 At the top of your post, please indicate SUPPORT or OPPOSE and then give your rationale.  Then after you can view your classmates' posts, make your case to your fellow students. 

2.There was a law that individuals who were indigent and who wished to litigate could apply to the courts for a total waiver of the normal filing fee.  In the legislative session, however, a statute was enacted which limits the courts' authority to waive filing fees in lawsuits brought by prisoners against the state government.

Under this new law, a court has to require the prisoner to pay a filing fee "equal to 20 percent ... of the average monthly deposits made to the prisoner's [prison] account ... or the average balance in that account", whichever is greater (unless this calculation yields a figure larger than the normal filing fee).

A prisoner (who was indigent) wanted to appeal his case and was to be charged this fee.  He filed suit claiming it was unconstitutional to charge this fee to prisoners. 

Choose the side of the prisoner or the side of the state and tell why you would rule for the side you chose.    

At the top of your post, please indicate SUPPORT PRISONER or OPPOSE PRISONER and then give your rationale.  After you can view your classmates' posts, make your case to your fellow students. 

3.A defendant pleaded guilty to receiving and possessing child pornography and was sentenced to 108 months in prison.  The sentencing judge raised the defendant’s base offense level….by two levels because "a computer was used for the transmission" of the illegal material.

The appeal filed challenged the punishment enhancement (not his guilt of the base punishment.)

The defendant argued the law did not apply to him because he did not use a computer to transmit the material.  (ie He was the receiver, not the sender, of the child pornography.)

Do you believe that the sentence enhancement should be upheld?  Give an economic analysis and rational for your choice. 

At the top of your post, please indicate SENTENCE UPHELD or SENTENCE REVERSED and then give your economic analysis/rationale.  After you can view your classmates' posts, make your case to your fellow students. 

4.The ordinance was enacted that gives tenants more legal rights including:

• the payment of interest on security deposits;


• requires that those deposits be held in Illinois banks;


• allows (with some limitations) a tenant to withhold rent in an amount reflecting the cost to him of the landlord's violating a term in the lease;


• allows a tenant to make minor repairs and subtract the reasonable cost of the repair from his rent;


• forbids a landlord to charge a tenant more than $10 a month for late payment of rent (regardless of how much is owing); and


• creates a presumption (albeit rebuttable) that a landlord who seeks to evict a tenant after the tenant has exercised rights conferred by the ordinance is retaliating against the tenant for the exercise of those rights.

The stated purpose of the ordinance is to promote public health, safety, and welfare and the quality of housing in Chicago. 

A lawsuit and subsequently an appeal was filed challenging the constitutionality of this ordinance. 

In this forum please focus on these two rights: 

• allows (with some limitations) a tenant to withhold rent in an amount reflecting the cost to him of the landlord's violating a term in the lease;


• allows a tenant to make minor repairs and subtract the reasonable cost of the repair from his rent;

Provide an economic analysis/economic prediction of this law.  Be sure to include who is helped by this law and who is hurt by this law and then give your rationale.  Then after you can view your classmates' posts, make your case to your fellow students.

5.The ordinance was enacted that gives tenants more legal rights including:

• the payment of interest on security deposits;


• requires that those deposits be held in Illinois banks;


• allows (with some limitations) a tenant to withhold rent in an amount reflecting the cost to him of the landlord's violating a term in the lease;


• allows a tenant to make minor repairs and subtract the reasonable cost of the repair from his rent;


• forbids a landlord to charge a tenant more than $10 a month for late payment of rent (regardless of how much is owed); and


• creates a presumption (albeit rebuttable) that a landlord who seeks to evict a tenant after the tenant has exercised rights conferred by the ordinance is retaliating against the tenant for the exercise of those rights.

The stated purpose of the ordinance is to promote public health, safety, and welfare and the quality of housing in Chicago. 

A lawsuit and subsequently an appeal was filed challenging the constitutionality of this ordinance. 

In this forum please focus on these two rights: 

• forbids a landlord to charge a tenant more than $10 a month for late payment of rent (regardless of how much is owed


• the payment of interest on security deposits;

Provide an economic analysis/economic prediction of this law.  Be sure to include who is helped by this law and who is hurt by this law and then give your rationale.  Then after you can view your classmates' posts, make your case to your fellow students.