Rent More, Save More! Use code: KBRENTAL

Emanuel Law Outlines for Constitutional Law

List Price $65.29 Save

Rent $42.01

Added Benefits of Renting

Free Shipping Both Ways
Highlight/Take Notes Like You Own It
Purchase/Extend Before Due Date

List Price $65.29 Save $0.40

New $64.89

Usually Ships in 3-5 Business Days

We Buy This Book Back!

Included with your book

Free Shipping On Every Order

Note: Supplemental materials are not guaranteed with Rental or Used book purchases.

Need to keep your rental past your due date? At any time before your due date you can extend or purchase your rental through your account.

ABOUT THE BOOK—TOOLS TO SUCCEED

The Capsule Summary provides a quick reference summary of the key concepts covered in the full Outline.
The detailed course Outline with black letter principles supplements your casebook reading throughout the semester and gives structure to your own outline.
The Quiz Yourselffeature includes a series of short-answer questions and sample answers to help you test your knowledge of the chapter’s content.
Exam Tips alert you to issues and commonly used fact patterns found on exams.
The Casebook Correlation Chart correlates each section in the Outline with the pages covering that topic in the major casebooks.

INCLUDED IN THIS NEW EDITION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW EMANUEL® LAW OUTLINE
Coverage of key 2023–2024 Supreme Court developments, including:

Trump v. U.S., holding that Presidents are entitled to at least a presumption of immunity from criminal prosecution for their official acts. In some contexts, the immunity is absolute, and in others, the President benefits from a strong “presumption of immunity” that will be difficult for the prosecution to rebut.
U.S. v. Rahimi, a Second Amendment case, holding that government may restrict certain persons from owning guns. However, the restriction must be “relevantly similar” to restrictions that existed in 1791.
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, indicating that government likely violates the free-expression rights of a social media platform if government enacts an “anti-censorship” rule that requires the platform to include third-party posts that the platform wants to keep off the site.
Murthy v. Missouri, a case about standing, holding that a plaintiff does not have standing unless she can show that a favorable outcome in the suit would “redress” the harm from whatever action (usually a government action) the plaintiff is challenging.