The first half of this course asked you to think critically about three different legal systems, and consider the challenges that arise when they encounter one another. The second half of the course closely examines the discipline of writing legal history. This final paper assignment asks you to look at a specific archive to help illustrate a point of (relatively recent) legal history. Below, you will find two essay prompts, from which you must choose one to write your final paper outline and assignment. In the essay prompts below, you are asked to analyze a change in law in light of an archive provided and the themes discussed in this course, which include (but are not limited to):
Historical Analysis of Law
Legal Archives (and the creation thereof)
Politics of Legal Empires
Symbolism of Law
No additional research is necessary for this assignment. You may only use the material provided by the essay prompts and materials from the syllabus. For this assignment you must engage with both the archive provided as well as a minimum of three readings discussed in the second half of this course (Weeks 9 – 12 on the Syllabus).
Your essay must conform to the following format:
Format: Typed and double spaced.
Font: Times New Roman 12-point font.
Margins: 1 inch on all four sides
Submission Process: One-page outline submitted on Quercus by 5:00 PM on March 29th, and Final Papers submitted by 5:00 PM on April 19th. Late assignments will be subject to a 3% deduction per day. Contact your TA if you need an extension.
Length: 2,500 words. TA’s will not read beyond 2,500 words of writing. This word limit does not include the title page (with name and course code), or the references/bibliography page.
Format: Standard essay format, including an introduction (with a thesis statement), body paragraphs that are informative and help support the thesis, and a concluding paragraph.
Citations: All essays must cite at least three of the course readings listed in the syllabus that we discussed after the midterm. Readings must be cited throughout the essay (in-text) and on a references/bibliography page. There is no mandatory citation style (APA, Chicago, McGill, etc.); however, you must choose one citation style and use it consistently throughout the essay. Lastly, specific page numbers must also be provided for all in-text or footnoted citations regardless of citation style chosen.
Essay #1 – Rights of Nature (RoN) & Rivers as Legal Persons
Background:
Legal Personhood is a designation at law that allows the bearer to claim, among other things, legal rights. Human beings over the age of majority have legal personhood. Those under the age of 18, while rights bearing, do not have full legal personhood (minors cannot be held liable to contracts they sign). But legal personhood is not limited to human beings. It is also extended to things like corporations. Though corporations are not “persons” in the biological sense, the law allows them to claim “legal personhood” and act as if they have the legal capacity to own property, make contracts, and sue in court (though it is not settled across jurisdictions whether corporations enjoy certain human-oriented freedoms, such as freedom of religion or speech).
An interesting discussion of legal personhood surrounds (1) rights of nature (RoN), (2) legal personhood of rivers, and (3) Indigenous law. As we learned in the Heiltsuk Tribal Council Adjudicative Decision, protection of nature – especially water ecosystems– is prevalent in Indigenous law. A few global examples of the rights of nature being recognized include:
In 2008, Ecuador’s new Constitution expressly recognized the rights of nature.
In 2017, several courts in India began recognizing the rights of nature, particularly the rights of rivers, in their judgements.
Also in 2017, New Zealand – as advocated by the Māori population – passed a law grating legal personhood to the Whanganui River.
Essay Prompt:
In Canada, in 2021, the Magpie River (aka Mutehekau Shipu) in Quebec was granted legal personhood by joint resolutions made by the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit and the regional government of Minganie. While the Magpie’s legal personhood is a huge win for the RoN in Canada, it has not yet been tested in court or formally recognized by any provincial or federal Canadian government. This creates an interesting topic for legal discussion.
Here are links for three materials that are need!
https://www.bigorrin.org/archive109.htm
https://www.bigorrin.org/archive107.htm
https://youtu.be/ggGj5HhHnmI?si=OxLPWyi2JFTSfHM6
