Instructions Submit a critique of the decision in your chosen case. The critique should discuss the final decision rendered by the Court in the case, as well as the type of judgment given (e.g., sum

POL 328 Final Project Milestone Three: Case Decision Critique Guidelines and Rubric Overview For the final project for this course, you will be writing a legal analysis research paper based on a judicial decision of hi storical importance. (See the Final Project Document for more information.) Having traced the pathway your chosen case followed to reach the Supreme Court in Milestone T wo, in this milestone, you will submit a critique of the decision in your chosen case. The critique should discuss the fina l decision rendered by the Court in the case , as well as the type of judgment given ( e.g., summary judgment , dismissal, remand, resolution ). The critique should also discuss how well the decision reflects an accurate interpretation of the Constitution, wha t (if any) judicial philosophy is evident in the court’s decision, and whether the decision was unanimous or contained concurrences and/or dissents. Finally, discuss any precedents invoked by the court in rendering its decision. Prompt The following cri tical elements will be addressed in this submission: Critique the decision of the case.  What is the decision of the final court in this case? What type of judgment was given? Explain.  Is the decision an accurate judicial interpretation of the constitutio n? Why or why not?  What judicial philosophy was employed by the majority in the opinion?  Were there concurring or dissenting opinions in the case?  Evaluate the use of past precedents in the legal rationale utilized for this judicial opinion. What was th e controlling law in the decision? Requirements of Submission : The Case Decision Critique should follow these formatting guidelines: double -spaced Word document, 2–3 pages in length, not including title page and references , 12 -point T imes New Roman font, one -inch margins, APA format, and a minimum of two sources. Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (85%) Needs Improvement (55%) Not Evident (0%) Value Decision Meets “Proficient” criteria and explanation is supported by scholarly research Expl ains the decision of the final court in detail, with explanatio n to the type of judgment given Explains the decision of the final court, but explanation is missing key details or the type of judgment given is missing Does not explain the decision of the fi nal court 10 Decision Accuracy Meets “Proficient” criteria and defense is crafted in a thought - provoking context Critiques the final decision for accuracy of judicial interpretation of the constitution and evidence is given in support or opposition of this position Critiques the final decision for accuracy of judicial interpretation of the constitution, but evidence is not given in support or opposition of this position Does not critique the final decision for accuracy of judicial interpretation of the constitution 10 Philosophy Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses scholarly research to substantiate claims Accurately identifies and critiques the judicial philosophy employed by the majority in the case Accurately identifies the judicial philosophy emp loyed by the majority in the case, but does not critiques Does not accurately identify the judicial philosophy employed by the majority in the case 20 Opinions Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses concrete examples to substantiate claims Accurately id entifies and critiques any dissenting and/or concurring opinions Accurately identifies any dissenting and/or concurring opinions, but does not perform an adequate critique Does not accurately identify the dissenting and/or concurring opinions 20 Past Pr ecedents Meets “Proficient” criteria and uses scholarly research to substantiate claims Analyzes the use of past precedents in the judicial opinion and identifies the controlling law which informed the decision Analyzes the use of past precedents in the judicial opinion, but does not identify the controlling law which informed the decision Does not analyze the past precedents in the judicial opinion 20 Articulation of Response Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax , and organization and is presented in a professional and easy -to-read format Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or o rganization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas 20 Earned Total 100%