1.  Personally, I don’t think it’s much work at all. Usually, you have some aide draft it, and they’re the ones looking into the legal details. All you have to do is basically pick whether you want to do it, and sign it. With pictures. And a signing statement. Invade a country? Sure. Pardon a friend? No problem. Sleep with interns? Why not? I’d think it was actually pretty interesting, myself. After all, what good is being the president if you don’t have any power? Besides, if SCOTUS gets involved, it just get that much more interesting.

2.  Larsen is hilarious, energetic, and extremely enthusiastic about con law. Her teaching style is great as well because she literally covers everything you need to know in class-- from the facts of cases to the rules you need to know, etc. If you get an old outline and take half way decent notes in class you can honestly get away with not doing any of the reading. The only negative was her exam because it was entirely too easy. It made for a brutal curve because pretty much everyone hit all the issues and the difference between an A and a B was how much BS you added to your exam.

3. Took Larsen for Con Law last year and comment #2 is dead on. In fact, the only case I read the entire semester was Marbury. The class was great and she is a great prof, but her exam was WAY to EASY, which made for a BS curve. Literally the difference between an A and a B was how much fluff you added to your exam because it was a 4 hour exam and it took about 2 hours to complete. The other 2 hours was time to sit there and add fluff, which made the difference between an A and a B.

4.  I had Larsen for con law and found her pretty irritating. She's clearly into being that funny cool professor, but at the expense of really engaging with interesting issues. Her casual style is borderline offensive when it comes to discussing issues like affirmative action or gender inequality. That said, the class was super easy. Get an old outline and follow along! Only don't quote it verbatim when she calls on you, she notices that.

5.  Pretty terrible professor - wouldn't recommend. I've seen her embarrass students for being unprepared, which in my mind is unnecessary. Also, she rambles a ton - little structure in her presentation. Look elsewhere for Con Law if you can.

Widget is loading comments...

Make a free website with Yola