Sessions v. Morales-Santana is a Supreme Court case involving the Trump administration’s policy of separating families at the border. The case challenged the legality of the policy, which was implemented by the Department of Homeland Security. The plaintiffs in the case were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, while the government was represented by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the policy violated the Flores settlement agreement, which protects children in immigration custody.
Best Structure for Sessions v Morales Santana
When it comes to designing the structure of your sessions, there are many factors to consider. The best structure will vary depending on the specific needs of your learners, the content you are teaching, and the learning environment. However, there are some general principles that can help you create effective and engaging sessions.
- Start with a clear objective. What do you want your learners to achieve by the end of the session? Once you know your objective, you can design your session accordingly.
- Use a variety of activities. Don’t just lecture for the entire session. Mix things up with activities such as discussions, group work, and simulations. This will help keep your learners engaged and help them learn more effectively.
- Provide feedback. Let your learners know how they are doing. This can be done through verbal feedback, written feedback, or self-assessment. Feedback helps learners track their progress and identify areas where they need to improve.
- End with a summary. Recap the main points of the session and remind your learners of the objective. This will help them solidify their learning and retain the information they have learned.
Here is a sample structure for a session that you can use as a starting point:
1. Introduction (5 minutes)
- Welcome learners and introduce yourself
- State the objective of the session
2. Pre-test (5 minutes)
- Assess learners’ prior knowledge and understanding of the topic
3. Input (20 minutes)
- Present new information and concepts
- Use a variety of teaching methods such as lecture, discussion, and group work
4. Practice (20 minutes)
- Provide opportunities for learners to practice what they have learned
- Use activities such as simulations, role-playing, and case studies
5. Assessment (10 minutes)
- Assess learners’ understanding of the topic
- Use a variety of assessment methods such as quizzes, tests, and projects
6. Summary (5 minutes)
- Recap the main points of the session
- Remind learners of the objective
7. Evaluation (5 minutes)
- Ask learners for feedback on the session
- Use this feedback to improve your future sessions
Question 1:
- What are the key differences between the Sessions v. Morales-Santana case and other recent cases in criminal law?
Answer:
- The Sessions v. Morales-Santana case ruled that the use of the residual clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) is unconstitutionally vague.
- This differs from other recent cases in criminal law, such as Vega v. Tekoh, which upheld the vagueness of the Armed Career Criminal Act in the context of a Hobbs Act conviction.
- The Sessions v. Morales-Santana case also differed from Bailey v. United States, which held that the residual clause of the ACCA was unconstitutionally vague as applied to a defendant with prior convictions for aggravated assault.
Question 2:
- How did the Supreme Court’s decision in Sessions v. Morales-Santana impact plea bargaining practices?
Answer:
- The Sessions v. Morales-Santana decision made it more difficult for prosecutors to charge defendants under the Armed Career Criminal Act.
- As a result, prosecutors are less likely to offer plea bargains that include enhancements under the ACCA.
- This has led to a decrease in the number of defendants who are subject to the mandatory minimum sentences of the ACCA.
Question 3:
- What is the significance of the concurring opinion written by Justice Kennedy in Sessions v. Morales-Santana?
Answer:
- Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion in Sessions v. Morales-Santana suggested that the Court could eventually strike down the entire Armed Career Criminal Act as unconstitutionally vague.
- This opinion has given hope to criminal defense attorneys who argue that the ACCA is overbroad and unfairly targets certain categories of defendants.
- However, it is important to note that Justice Kennedy did not explicitly call for the ACCA to be overturned, and his opinion does not bind the other Justices.
Well, folks, that’s the skinny on Sessions v. Morales-Santana. It was a wild ride, but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the DREAMers. Thanks for sticking with us through all the legal jargon and political wrangling. We hope you found this article informative and engaging. If you have any questions, feel free to drop us a line. And be sure to check back soon for more updates on this and other important legal battles.