DOCSLIB.ORG

No. 18-5188 Supreme Court of the United

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
No. 18-5188 Supreme Court of the United No. 18-5188 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM 2019 _______________________________________ HANK SCHRADER, Petitioner, v. STATE OF NEW TEJAS, Respondent. _______________________________________ ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRTEENTH CIRCUIT _______________________________________ BRIEF FOR THE PETITIONER _______________________________________ TEAM NUMBER 18 NOVEMBER 18, 2019 COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether disputed facts underlying a federal officer’s motion to dismiss a state criminal prosecution based on Supremacy Clause immunity are decided by the district court or viewed in the light most favorable to the State. II. Whether a federal officer is immune from state criminal prosecution under the Supremacy Clause when he acts within the general scope of his duties and does not violate clearly established federal law. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS QUESTIONS PRESENTED ............................................................................................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .............................................................................................vi OPINIONS BELOW .......................................................................................................... 1 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT................................................................................... 1 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS ............................................... 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE .......................................................................................... 2 I. Factual History ....................................................................................................... 2 II. Procedural History .................................................................................................. 5 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT .................................................................................. 7 ARGUMENT....................................................................................................................... 9 I. THE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY RESOLVED DISPUTED ISSUES OF FACT UPON WHICH IT GRANTED AGENT SCHRADER’S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE. ........................................................................................ 9 A. The District Court’s Resolution of Disputed Issues of Fact Did Not Invade the Province of the Ultimate Fact Finder. ......................... 10 B. Viewing the Facts in the Light Most Favorable to the State Undermines the Purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 1442 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b) by Restricting the Federal Court’s Ability to Provide an Unbiased Safeguard. ..................................... 14 1. A district court is not precluded from deciding issues of fact when the purpose of the state criminal prosecution is to frustrate the enforcement of federal law. ........................................ 15 2. The criminal liability at stake further necessitates the need for the district court to act as a safeguard. .................................... 17 iii II. SUPREMACY CLAUSE IMMUNITY ONLY REQUIRES THAT A FEDERAL OFFICER ACTS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HIS GENERAL DUTIES AND NOT VIOLATE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED FEDERAL LAW. ...................................................................... 19 A. The First Prong of the Two-Part Test is Satisfied if an Officer Was Acting Within the Scope of his Federal Duties. ................................... 20 1. The narrow approach adopted by the Thirteenth Circuit is unsupported by jurisprudence and impedes the execution of United States laws. .............................................................. 22 a. The seminal case on Supremacy Clause immunity demonstrates the Supreme Court’s rejection of the restrictive application adopted by the Thirteenth Circuit. ................................................................................................... 22 b. Several circuit courts do not follow the restrictive application adopted by the Thirteenth Circuit. ................................. 23 2. The Supreme Court routinely looks to the general scope of duties when determining authorized acts in immunity cases. ........................................................................................................... 26 B. The Second Prong of The Supremacy Clause Immunity Analysis Should Only Consider Whether a Federal Officer Violated Clearly Established Federal Law. .................................................. 28 1. The Thirteenth Circuit improperly considered Agent Schrader’s subjective intent. ..................................................................... 29 a. The Supreme Court has never examined an officer’s subjective intent for Supremacy Clause immunity. .......................... 29 b. The Ninth and Tenth Circuits join the Supreme Court in not examining a federal officer’s subjective intent. ........... 30 c. The Supreme Court consistently does not examine a subjective element in other immunity cases................................... 31 2. A federal officer’s actions are objectively reasonable absent a violation of clearly established federal law. ............................. 33 iv a. The Supreme Court recognizes that state governments should not regulate the manner and means by which a federal officer carries out his duties. ................... 34 b. The regulation of a federal officer’s duties may only come from federal law. ................................................................. 36 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 39 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ........................................................................................ 40 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ............................................................................... 41 APPENDIX A: CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS ..................................................... 42 APPENDIX B: STATUTORY PROVISIONS ................................................................. 43 v TABLE OF AUTHORTIES United States Supreme Court Decisions Arizona v. Manypenny, 451 U.S. 232 (1981) ................................................................. 18 Barr v. Mateo, 360 U.S. 564 (1959) ......................................................................... 26, 27 Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824) ................................................................................ 34 Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 475 U.S. 800 (1982)............................................................. passim Johnson v. Maryland, 254 U.S. 51 (1920) ............................................................... 35, 36 McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819) ....................................................... 9, 19, 34 Mesa v. California, 489 U.S. 121 (1989) ................................................................... 5, 14 In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890) ............................................................................... passim Ohio v. Thomas, 173 U.S. 276 (1899) .................................................... 14, 28, 34, 35, 36 Tennessee v. Davis, 100 U.S. 257 (1879) ...................................................... 9, 17, 18, 19 United States v. Covington, 395 U.S. 57 (1969) ............................................................ 10 Willingham v. Morgan, 395 U.S. 402 (1969) .......................................................... 15, 18 United States Court of Appeals Decisions Act Up!/Portland v. Bagley, 988 F.2d 868 (9th Cir. 1993)............................................ 18 Baucom v. Martin, 677 F.2d 1346 (11th Cir. 1982) ............................................... 21, 25 Clifton v. Cox, 549 F.2d 722 (9th Cir. 1977) .................................................................. 25 Denson v. United States, 574 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2009) ............................................ 20 Gregoire v. Biddle, 177 F.2d 579 (2d Cir.1949) ............................................................. 32 Idaho v. Horiuchi, 253 F.3d 359 (9th Cir.), vacated as moot, 266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001) .............................................................................. 12, 18, 30 Kentucky v. Long, 837 F.2d 727 (6th Cir. 1988) ................................................... passim vi Morgan. v. California, 743 F.2d 728 (9th Cir. 1984) .................................... 9, 15, 16, 17 New York v. Tanella, 374 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2004) ................................................. 12, 17 Texas v. Kleinert, 855 F.3d 305 (5th Cir. 2017) ............................................... 23, 24, 27 United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983) .......................................... 10, 11 United States v. Jones, 542 F.2d 661 (6th Cir. 1976) ............................................ 10, 11 United States v. Korn, 557 F.2d 1089 (5th Cir. 1977) .................................................. 11 United States v. Mendoza, 78 F.3d 460 (9th Cir. 1996) ............................................... 11 United States v. Miller, 491 F.2d 638 (5th Cir. 1974) .................................................. 11 United States v. Gutierrez-Zamarano, 23 F.3d 235 (9th Cir. 1994)............................ 11 Whitehead v. Senkowski, 943 F.2d 230 (2d Cir. 1991) ................................................. 15 Wyoming v. Livingston, 443 F.3d 1211 (10th Cir. 2006)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outstanding Casting for a Drama Series
    Outstanding Casting for a Drama Series Episode 511, “Confessions”: Walt, Skylar, Hank & Marie meet to discuss what's next. Trent, just doing his job, interrupts this very tense situation...more than once. Walter White … Bryan Cranston Skyler White … Anna Gunn Hank Schrader … Dean Norris Marie Schrader … Betsey Brandt Trent* … Guy Wilson Episode 515, “Granite State”: The Disappearer returns to Walt at his hideout in New Hampshire to bring him supplies. Walter White … Bryan Cranston The Disappearer* … Robert Forrester Episode 516, “Felina”: Walt returns to Elliott & Gretchen's. Our fan favorites Badger & Skinny Pete are not far behind. Walter White … Bryan Cranston Elliott … Adam Godley Gretchen … Jessica Hecht Badger … Matt Jones Skinny Pete … Charles Baker Lydia & Todd have an unexpected visit from Walt at the weekly coffee shop meeting Walter White … Bryan Cranston Lydia* … Laura Fraser Todd* … Jesse Plemons The shootout between Jack’s gang and Walter’s machine. The final good-bye. Walter White … Bryan Cranston Jesse Pinkman … Aaron Paul Todd* … Jesse Plemons Uncle Jack* … Michael Bowen Kenny* … Kevin Rankin Lester* … Tait Fletcher Jack’s Man* … Matthew T. Metzler Frankie* … Patrick Shane *Cast this season Casting Summary for Production 12-20-2012 BREAKING BAD Artist Episode # Episode Title Role Name Series Stars: BRANDT, BETSY MARIE CRANSTON, BRYAN WALTER WHITE GUNN, ANNA SKYLER WHITE MITTE, RJ WALTER, JR. NORRIS, DEAN HANK ODENKIRK, BOB SAUL GOODMAN PAUL, AARON JESSE Guest Cast: BAKER, CHARLES 509 BLOOD MONEY SKINNY PETE BRUMMETT,
    [Show full text]
  • The Hero As Villain in Contemporary Televised Narratives
    THE ONE WHO KNOCKS: THE HERO AS VILLAIN IN CONTEMPORARY TELEVISED NARRATIVES Maria João Brasão Marques Dissertação de Mestrado em Línguas, Literaturas e Culturas Estudos Ingleses e Norte-Americanos Março de 2016 Dissertação apresentada para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Línguas, Literaturas e Culturas – Estudos Ingleses e Norte-Americanos realizada sob a orientação científica da Professora Doutora Isabel Oliveira Martins. Show me a hero and I will write you a tragedy. F. Scott Fitzgerald AGRADECIMENTOS À minha orientadora, a Professora Doutora Isabel Oliveira Martins, pela confiança e pelo carinho nesta jornada e fora dela, por me fazer amar e odiar os Estados Unidos da América em igual medida (promessa feita no primeiro ano da faculdade), por me ensinar a ser cúmplice de Twain, Fitzgerald, Melville, McCarthy, Whitman, Carver, tantos outros. Agradeço principalmente a sua generosidade maior e uma paixão que contagia. Às Professoras Iolanda Ramos e Teresa Botelho, por encorajarem o meu investimento académico e por me facultarem materiais indispensáveis nesta dissertação, ao mesmo tempo que contribuíram para o meu gosto pela cultura inglesa e norte-americana. À professora Júlia Cardoso, por acreditar nesta demanda comigo e me fazer persistir até chegar a bom porto. Ao Professor João Maria Mendes, para sempre responsável pela minha paixão pelas narrativas, pelos heróis, pelo prazer de contar histórias que se mostram, pelo gosto de construir personagens que falham constantemente e que constantemente se reerguem. Aos meus pais, por me deixarem continuar a estudar. THE ONE WHO KNOCKS: THE HERO AS VILLAIN IN CONTEMPORARY TELEVISED NARRATIVES MARIA JOÃO BRASÃO MARQUES RESUMO PALAVRAS-CHAVE: herói, anti-herói, protagonista, storytelling televisivo, revolução criativa, paradigma do herói, vilão.
    [Show full text]
  • State University of New York at New Paltz Breaking Bad and the Intersection of Critical Theory at Race, Disability, and Gender
    Breaking Bad and the intersection of critical theory at race, disability, and gender Item Type Honor's Project Authors McDonough, Matthew Rights Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Download date 01/10/2021 02:24:17 Item License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/1578 State University of New York at New Paltz Breaking Bad and the Intersection of Critical Theory at Race, Disability, and Gender Matthew McDonough Independent Study Honors 495-06 Professor Sarah Wyman 8 December 2020 Thesis Abstract: The television series Breaking Bad (created by Vince Gilligan) is considered by audience and critics alike as one of the greatest television series ever made. It tells the story of the rise and fall of Walter White (Bryan Cranston), a mild-mannered chemistry teacher turned meth kingpin. He turns to a life of crime after having been diagnosed with terminal cancer, and he sees meth manufacturing as the most lucrative way to provide for his family. It has been nearly a decade since the series finale, yet it endures through sequel films, spin-offs, and online streaming. My thesis investigates the series’ staying power, and I would argue that lies in its thematic content. Breaking Bad is not just a straightforward story of one man’s descent into a life of crime, but it is also a mediation on dominant, repressive power structures. The series offers a look at these structures through the lens of race, gender, and disability through the actions of characters and their interactions with one another.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Secret Protection Gone Rogue the Walter White Case Study by Anthony M
    LOS ANGELES & SAN FRANCISCO www.dailyjournal.com WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2020 Trade Secret Protection Gone Rogue The Walter White Case Study By Anthony M. Fares, Randall E. Kay and Cheryl L. O’Connor alter White perfected a recipe for cooking crystal meth that revolutionized the drug trade, and W his fictional efforts to protect his secret recipe gained worldwide attention. White’s enterprise illustrates a number of lessons for companies seeking to protect trade secrets. Under the Defend Trade Secrets grew, he needed help to produce the recipe, he held it close within Pinkman out of business for life. Act, information must meet three enough product to meet demand, his partnership with White. While Fortunately, most companies requirements to earn trade secret so he had to disclose his secret Pinkman taught the recipe to rival have more peaceful solutions to protection: (1) it derives value recipe to three others to assist cartel members, Gus Fring subse- prevent intra-company conflicts from not being generally known; with manufacturing. Businesses quently murdered them, eliminat- about trade secret ownership. (2) others can obtain economic of all types face this same dilem- ing threat of improper disclosure. For example, many businesses value from its disclosure or use; ma of maintaining secrecy while Similarly, White’s disclosure to use invention disclosure agree- and (3) the owner took reason- needing to disclose trade secrets his understudy Gale Boetticher ments, or IDAs, which assign all able measures to keep it secret. to employees or business partners. did not destroy the recipe’s secre- intellectual property created by 18 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • A Monomyth Analysis of Breaking Bad
    Breaking Myths: A monomyth analysis of Breaking Bad. Treball de Fi de Grau Grau d’Estudis d’Anglès i Espanyol Supervised by Jéssica Faciabén Lago Iván Cirilo Ramos 2019-2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction: a working definition of monomyth .................................................................... 1 2. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. The monomyth in Literary Criticism: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly. ......................................... 4 4. Hypothesis and challenges .......................................................................................................... 7 5. Monomyth Archetypes in Breaking Bad .................................................................................... 8 5.1 Heroes ................................................................................................................................ 8 5.2 Shapeshifters .................................................................................................................... 10 5.3Trickster ............................................................................................................................ 12 5.4 Threshold Guardian ......................................................................................................... 13 5.5 Mentors ............................................................................................................................ 14 5.6 Shadows ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Bad | Dialogue Transcript | S5:E2
    CREATED BY Vince Gilligan EPISODE 5.02 “Madrigal” Walt and Jesse decide to look for a new partner to help them in their latest scheme. The DEA sifts through various leads, hoping to find something. WRITTEN BY: Vince Gilligan DIRECTED BY: Michelle MacLaren ORIGINAL BROADCAST: July 22, 2012 NOTE: This is a transcription of the spoken dialogue and audio, with time-code reference, provided without cost by 8FLiX.com for your entertainment, convenience, and study. This version may not be exactly as written in the original script; however, the intellectual property is still reserved by the original source and may be subject to copyright. MAIN EPISODE CAST Bryan Cranston ... Walter White Anna Gunn ... Skyler White Aaron Paul ... Jesse Pinkman Dean Norris ... Hank Schrader Betsy Brandt ... Marie Schrader (credit only) RJ Mitte ... Walter White, Jr. Bob Odenkirk ... Saul Goodman Jonathan Banks ... Mike Ehrmantraut Laura Fraser ... Lydia Rodarte-Quayle Steven Michael Quezada ... Steven Gomez Michael Shamus Wiles ... ASAC George Merkert Norbert Weisser ... Peter Schuler Wolf Muser ... Herr Herzog Carrington Vilmont ... Chief Food Technician James Ning ... Duane Chow Kaija Bales ... Kaylee Ehrmantraut Christopher King ... Chris Mara Norma Maldonado ... Delores Debrianna Mansini ... Fran Trine Christensen ... Ms. Tromel Mathias Kaesebier ... Lawyer Brennan Foster ... Detective Lillian Presley Leyba ... Kiira 1 00:00:01,919 --> 00:00:03,795 Honey mustard. 2 00:00:04,213 --> 00:00:06,215 As per the Research Department... 3 00:00:06,381 --> 00:00:08,091 ...this is our sweeter formulation... 4 00:00:08,258 --> 00:00:09,760 ...for the American Midwest. 5 00:00:10,344 --> 00:00:13,764 While we've upped its Brix number by 14 percent..
    [Show full text]
  • Midlife Leading Man Breaking Bad’S Dean Norris, a Prime-Time Stalwart
    MONTAGE Left to right: An Aero L-39 Albatros (foreground) and Dassault Falcon 2000 over the Golden Gate Bridge; a World War II-era North American P-51 Mustang over New York City; an Oracle Challenger (red) and Wolfpitts (yellow); Ambats shooting from a Beechcraft A36 Bonanza photoship H BY DAVID FARR DAVID H BY P pilots,” specialists trained to fly feet higher.” Even such a small change can in close formation with other drastically alter the composition. PHOTOGRA planes: some are former Blue An- Ambats usually works from a Beech- gels or Thunderbirds. With ex- craft Bonanza with the rear doors re- posures from ranges as close as 20 moved. (She does not shoot through to 150 feet, this kind of expertise glass.) A harness holds her securely in is essential or it’s “too risky,” she place. Working with a handheld high-end says. “It takes finesse to move an digital camera, she exposes several hun- pleasure. (She rents these craft, which cost airplane exactly 10 feet.” During the shoot, dred images per flight. Lenses with image around $480,000 each; private jets fall in she constantly feeds both pilots directions stabilization can help, and at times she the $3-million to $10-million range.) to line up the planes properly with each deploys a gyroscopic camera stabilizer, “if For shoots, she hires only “formation other and the background: “Biplane, 15 it’s a bumpy flight.” Midlife Leading Man Breaking Bad’s Dean Norris, a prime-time stalwart ean norris ’85 is headed home on a Stephen King science by limousine after finishing a fiction novel, was anchored photo shoot with—he kids— by Norris as “Big Jim” Ren- D “a few underlings from the net- nie, a power-hungry lo- work”: CBS Entertainment president Nina cal politician in a town Tassler and CBS Television Studios presi- suddenly cut off from the dent David Stapf.
    [Show full text]
  • Why We Should Spare Walter White: Breaking Bad and the True Power of Mitigation
    Volume 45 Issue 2 Breaking Bad and the Law Spring 2015 Why We Should Spare Walter White: Breaking Bad and the True Power of Mitigation Bidish J. Sarma Recommended Citation Bidish J. Sarma, Why We Should Spare Walter White: Breaking Bad and the True Power of Mitigation, 45 N.M. L. Rev. 429 (2015). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol45/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The University of New Mexico School of Law. For more information, please visit the New Mexico Law Review website: www.lawschool.unm.edu/nmlr \\jciprod01\productn\N\NMX\45-2\NMX207.txt unknown Seq: 1 7-MAY-15 13:45 WHY WE WOULD SPARE WALTER WHITE: BREAKING BAD AND THE TRUE POWER OF MITIGATION Bidish J. Sarma* INTRODUCTION What if federal authorities captured Walter White? Considering that he committed the murders of many individuals and orchestrated many more in the course of building and running his global meth trade, the prosecution would be able to seek the ultimate punishment against him. But, would a jury give him the death penalty? Walter’s gripping journey stirred within viewers a range of complex emotions, but even those re- volted by his actions must concede that it is extraordinarily difficult to envision a random collection of twelve people unanimously agreeing that he deserves a state-sanctioned execution. Indeed, it seems that many of us actually rooted for Walter throughout the series, even when we strug- gled to understand why. This Essay explores the answer to the question of why we would spare Walter White from the death penalty.
    [Show full text]
  • “I Am the One Who Knocks!”: What It Means to Be a Man in Breaking Bad. by Stephanie Wille Submitted to the Graduate Degree P
    “I am the one who knocks!”: What It Means to Be a Man in Breaking Bad. By Stephanie Wille Submitted to the graduate degree program in Film and Media Studies and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. John C. Tibbetts ________________________________ Dr. Ron Wilson ________________________________ Dr. Germaine Halegoua Date Defended: August 18, 2014 ii The Dissertation Committee for Stephanie Wille certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: “I am the one who knocks!”: What It Means to Be a Man in Breaking Bad. ________________________________ Chairperson Dr. John C. Tibbetts Date approved: October 30, 2014 iii Abstract Breaking Bad (AMC, 2008-2013) dramatizes the rise and fall of Walter White, a mild- mannered high school chemistry teacher who, through a series of misfortunes and freak opportunities, is transformed into a notorious, brutal drug kingpin -- a trajectory described as "Mr. Chips" to "Scarface." I contextualize and conduct a textual analysis of this acclaimed television series as a case study that demonstrates the increasingly complex construction of masculine identity in contemporary television. This study examines the reception of specific characters among critics and audiences, as well as investigates the ways in which the setting and depiction of ethnicities influence representations of masculinity. Calling for attention to the apparent lack in masculinity studies on television, the complex male representation in Breaking Bad suggests that men are not merely experiencing a crisis of their masculinity in contemporary society, but demonstrates that there is a problem with uniform white, hetero-normative representation of masculinity on TV.
    [Show full text]
  • In This Training… Org Chart Bpai History
    IN THIS TRAINING… Introduction to Organizational Structure History of our Agency Mission, Vision and Brand Promise of DCSS and BPAI 12/18 2.1 9/2018 ORG CHART BPAI HISTORY Inception to 1993 1993 to 2016 July 2016 9/2018 PRIOR TO 2016 DCSS BRAND PROMISE Public Assistance Fraud Investigations “Help today for a successful tomorrow by empowering our team to Early Fraud Full Field Prevention/Detection have a positive impact.” 9/2018 9/2018 HOLISTIC APPROACH TO BPAI VISION, MISSION, & BRAND PROMISE PROGRAM INTEGRITY Vision Deterrence Enhance the well-being of the communities we serve by ensuring the integrity of public Prosecution Prevention assistance programs, ensuring benefits go to San Diegans in need. Mission Conduct timely and fair investigations to safeguard the integrity of public assistance programs, ensuring benefits go to San Diegans in need. Investigation Detection Brand Promise Safeguard program integrity in a professional and respectful manner…every person, every time. Analysis Mitigation 9/2018 9/2018 INTERGENERATIONAL POVERTY TODAY Bureau of Public Assistance Investigations Early Fraud Investigations Early Community Homeless Team Allegation Team Intervention Long Term Fraud Non-Coop Team Action Team Team 9/2018 9/2018 HISTORY 10/2019 8/2018 LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS As a Law Enforcement Officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all; innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or maintain courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn, or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and ridicule; develop self-restraint; and be constantly mindful of the to respect the Constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality welfare of others.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Bad in the Classroom
    Volume 45 Issue 2 Breaking Bad and the Law Spring 2015 Breaking Bad in the Classroom Max Minzner University of New Mexico - Main Campus Recommended Citation Max Minzner, Breaking Bad in the Classroom, 45 N.M. L. Rev. 397 (2015). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol45/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The University of New Mexico School of Law. For more information, please visit the New Mexico Law Review website: www.lawschool.unm.edu/nmlr \\jciprod01\productn\N\NMX\45-2\NMX203.txt unknown Seq: 1 12-MAY-15 12:15 BREAKING BAD IN THE CLASSROOM Max Minzner* ABSTRACT Breaking Bad is often described as the transformation of Walter White—Mr. Chips becomes Scarface.1 Equally significant, though, are the journeys of Hank Schrader, his DEA pursuer, and Hank’s colleagues. The show is a study of law enforcement investigation in action. As a result, Breaking Bad can serve as a tool of pedagogy in criminal procedure. This Essay seeks to serve two ends. First, it provides a map for the use of the Breaking Bad series in the core constitutional criminal procedure course focusing on the limits on police investigation arising from the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Video is a powerful mechanism for presenting hypotheticals to students. Recent work on other shows such as The Wire has recognized the value of television as an alternative pedagogi- cal technique in the law school curriculum. Breaking Bad deserves to take its place as a teaching aid in a criminal procedure classroom.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovering Lost Moral Ground: Can Walt Make Amends?
    CHAPTER 10 Recovering Lost Moral Ground: Can Walt Make Amends? James Edwin Mahon and Joseph Mahon Is it possible to recover lost moral ground? In the closing episodes of Breaking Bad it becomes clear that Walter White believes that the correct answer to this question is an affi rmative one. Walt believes that he can, and that he has, recov- ered lost moral ground. Breaking Bad may be said to explore two distinct and incompatible ways of attempting to recover lost moral ground. The fi rst way is revisionist . This is to rewrite the script of what, morally speaking, has occurred, so that it appears that nothing wrong was done. Since no moral ground has been lost, there is no moral ground to recover. The second way is restorative . This is to admit to morally wrongful behavior, but to attempt to make amends for it. While we concede that it is possible to recover lost moral ground in both of these ways, we deny that Walt is able to do so in both of these ways. At best, Walt can only hope to recover lost moral ground by attempting to make amends for his past misdeeds. Before looking at these two kinds of attempts to recover lost moral ground in Walt’s case, however, two defenses against accusations of moral wrongdoing will fi rst be considered, since Walt also avails of these defenses. The fi rst is the justifi catory defense, that of seeking to justify the moral wrongdoing, so that it is no longer morally wrong. The second is the mitigatory defense, that of seek- ing to excuse the moral wrongdoing, so that the person is no longer respon- sible for the moral wrongdoing.
    [Show full text]