My exam is meant to be passed, and in principle all of you can do well on it, and in practice most of you will.
The first part will be vocabulary. 10 words. You may provide the German translation of the term. Then you write 1 to 3 sentences defining the term. You don’t need to provide an example of the term’s meaning or an example sentence using the term.
The second part will be a Klausur style question.
The format of my Klausur question will be just about exactly what you are seeing in your course on Staatsorganisationsrecht, but this time in English using the U.S. constitution, instead of the GG.
Moreover, it’s basically the same methodology!
Procedure (Verfahrensrecht)
1) Is the claim admissible? (Zuläßigkeit) <
Does the claimant have standing? Can this claimant appear before this court (which will be the U.S. district court for Washington D.C.).
That is, is there a current case or controversy, i.e. is the issue ripe? Or is it instead moot or unripe?
Is this claim justiciable? Is this claim a non-justiciable political question?
Substance (Materielles Recht) (Begrundetheit
1) Does the federal government have power to pass the legislation?
a) express power? (commerce, international relations, fiscal and monetary powers)
b) implied power? (“necessary and proper”)
2) If the federal government does have the power to pass this legislation, does the legislation interfere with a fundamental constitutional right?
It’s also the same methodology because IRAC is so similar to Fragesatz, Voraussetzungssatz, Definitionssatz, Subsumptionssatz, Ergebnis.
It’s also the same methodology because you use Savigny’s Method (Methodenlehre)
1) Look at the text, if it is plain meaning then stop the interpretation otherwise then look at
2) context (grammar, structure, flanking laws)
3) legislative history
4) Goals of the law (Sinn und Zweck – teleology).
Basically everything you learn in Staatsorganisationsrecht is what we are doing in my course, except in English and using the U.S. constitution instead of the GG.
Note however that the distinctions German constitutional procedure law makes between Organstreitverfahren, Bund-Land Streit, and Abstraktnormenkontrolle don’t exist in U.S. law. There is no abstract norm control in the U.S. law — advisory opinions are expreslly prohibited in the U.S. constitution.
Ok? Feel free to ask me about this! And yes, there is a list of vocabulary in the book, also on this weblog there should be. Learn Every Word You Can.
You will almost certainly all pass, and most of you will even do well. I understand it is new to you and thus seems overwhelming or confusing. I hope this makes it easier. Ask!
Eric