Your exam must be yours and yours alone: you may not collaborate or discuss this test with anyone, by any means, including online. Your writing must be your own and, where using the work of others, you must attribute and reference the source.
Important points of instruction:
• Discuss the two points below in equal measure, at a bare minimum of about 750 words per answer, for a total of 1500 words minimum. More… is almost always better!
• You should not focus solely on cases you wrote about in your midterm and case study—you may refer to them, but for any in-depth discussion, you must use new material. No doubling up!
• Do not make your analysis based on the written opinions of these two Supreme Court Justices alone—they are merely representative of frequently opposing ends of the Court. Similarly, do not focus on their biographical/professional details or lower court opinions.
• You can choose to write the discussion as either your monologue, or if you want to imagine what the Justices would say, as a discussion amongst the three of you. Quality content and clear presentation are your goals, and format is merely their vehicle–so don’t waste time and effort on lots of banter or “throat clearing.”
• Remember, boarding may begin and the conversation may end at any moment, so there is no need to tell the Justices things that they already would know— please don’t recite lengthy factual backgrounds of the cases! You should be diving in to discussion of the legal and public administration/policy issues based on the cases we have read this term.
• Citation styling is up to you, but provide enough information so that a source can be reliably found. For cases from the course, just the short name is appropriate. For an online source, an up-to-date web address is sufficient (but remember, only use reliable and substantial online sources!)
• Please proofread for clarity, precision, and organization! While the format is up to you, as a monologue, a three way discussion, etc., you are expected to produce substantial professional writing, as your final assignment.
Scenario: You find yourself stranded at Reagan National Airport late at night with only two other people seated nearby, U.S. Supreme Court Associate
Justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor. After the three of you engage in some humorous bantering about being stuck, you decide to take advantage of
the once-in-a-lifetime chance to discuss two points with key architects of the American legal landscape:

1. “Paint the picture” – Describe how contemporary U.S. public administration’s legal dimension looks from the vantage point of a public manager, using case law. The “legal dimension” means the full range of constitutional and administrative law—notably, cases from our course—affecting public administration.
2. “Critically analyze” – Describe what aspects of the legal dimension you agree and disagree with and how you think it could be improved. Offer a critique, citing to specific cases (and to a lesser extent, to our other academic materials on public administration) to illustrate and demonstrate your points.