Essay on Judicial Precedent

2) An argument should be focused on winning over an audience rather than beating them

* Try to make your points more concise. I had a hard time understanding what the main point of each paragraph was.

A strong written argument is supported by several methods that are used to legitimize the author’s position as well as to discredit any counterargument brought forth. The techniques include introducing a counterargument and weakening it’s position with evidence. Providing legitimate academic research such as statistics as well as anecdotes from scholars on the given subject can reinforce the author’s argument. Another important method used is requiring the reader to critically think about a subject brought forth by challenging their preconceived ideas about a topic. This may also include using hidden assumptions that use implicit statements which have a certain opinion such as “If I follow the rules, good things will happen”, this is common

| Central purpose or argument is not clearly identified. Analysis is vague or notevident. Reader is confused or may be misinformed.

In this article titled “Analyzing Arguments: Those You Read and Those You Write” goes over multiple strategies and examples to help you analyze the meaning and purpose of a specific argument and how to strengthen your own.

Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.

Agree, disagree, or partially agree/disagree with one of the arguments or perspectives that was expressed in the

The debate between Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint really grabbed my attention. Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint are two different ways to interpret the constitution and its laws. Both interpretations have their own strengths and weaknesses, which is why it is so hard to come to a final decision of which is acceptable and which is not (in most cases). While at the debate I didn’t realize how many cases have boiled down to these two concepts. There have been many cases ended up being decided by both interpretations.

By acknowledging the other viewpoint, the author can still present her argument and not offend the reader so much that they would quickly side against her. Using these techniques, the author effectively attracts the readers’ attention and explains the main point of the rest of the article.

There are many different ways to shed light on a problem that an author is writing about.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). The text of the Fourth Amendment does not define exactly what “unreasonable search” is. The framers of the constitution left the words “unreasonable search” open in order for the Supreme Court to interpret. Hence, by looking at

run by school officials, that it could be controlled by them, "so long as their

For the topic you choose: 1. Support your ideas with specific, illustrative examples. If there are questions or points associated with your chosen

harassment at the workplace is going too far. It used to be a threat of one's

possibly both. If your conclusion for an issue is not well-supported by your analysis for