Assignment:
You must pick a court decision, and then write a paper analyzing it from the Law and Economics perspective.
This means you need to:
1. Summarize the case.
2. Explain the court's ruling and justification, as well as the dissenting opinions.
3. Throw away all that legal mumbo jumbo and and think like an economist. Was the court's ruling efficient? Will it encourage people to use resources wisely? Will it inhibit voluntary exchange? How will it affect future decision makers? What incentives does it create for behavior? Does it have any unintended consequences? Does it conflict with any other laws?
I cannot emphasize this enough: For the purposes of this exercise, you are an economist. You are not a lawyer. You are not to supposed to decide whether the court followed existing precedent, or the Constitution, though those may be relevant to your view of the ruling's efficiency. Your standard of measurement is not legality, or procedure, or form, but efficiency.
I will not impose a length requirement, because length requirements are stupid. Your paper should be long enough to accomplish the goals listed above. It will probably be in the 5 to 10 page range (double spaced, typed, 12 point Times New Roman font, with 0.5" margins). I will not penalize or reward you for a longer or shorter paper.