Expert answer:Court case
Solved by verified expert:Hello, I want you to make an essay about the Massachusetts vs. EPA case. Here is a link for info of the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_v._Env…I have attached the instructions please take a look at it. Also I attached annotated bibliography for the sources
controversy_analysis_assignment_sheet_.doc
controversy_analysis_rubric.docx
annotated_bibliography.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
ENGL 102/ Gonzalez
Controversy Analysis: The Supreme Court
Ruling Essay
Unit Two Assignment
It’s no fluke that unit three follows unit two, and not vice versa: For this assignment, and to become an
eloquent and effective speaker, you must first listen what the media said regarding your specific ruling.
You should give the historical context and as much background as necessary to allow your reader into your
ruling.
For your essay, find a focusing question and examine the main arguments offering answers to it. You will be
covering how the media attempts to sway the public’s decision on an issue that was already decided—
by 9 people (in most cases). It would also put you in a better position to make your own well-informed
argument later in Unit 3.
Your essay will consist of a balance of 4 popular sources towards the pro, 4 popular sources covering the
con, and one book or highly academic (previously approved) source for the background.
After you have researched your issue, you are going to present your findings in an essay, in which you
examine and analyze the strengths and weaknesses in each of the viewpoints. As you examine each
viewpoint, consider the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Make sure that you give it a fair presentation.
Make sure you rhetorically analyze both the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence supporting it
and the line of reasoning used in it.
Use the words of the sources (quotes) to help present the arguments and their supports. However,
make sure the essay is your own—in other words, you are not going to stitch together a bunch of
quotes or paraphrases. You are going to present these arguments in your own words, using quotes
and paraphrases where appropriate to illustrate the arguments.
You will need to analyze as well as present, so use quotes or paraphrases to illustrate strong points
and flaws in the argument and then follow them with your analysis revealing the strengths or
weaknesses each illustrates.
Remember the rules of using sources: use them only to 1) illustrate, 2) clarify, or 3) provide
examples to analyze or refute.
You must use a minimum of nine sources for this assignment.
The Finer Points
At least 6 full pages, no more than 8 pages.
12-point Times New Roman, double-spaced, one-inch margins.
A creative title.
MLA style throughout (header, page numbers, in-text citations).
Works Cited page in MLA style.
Rubric for Controversy Analysis
Name: __________________________________
Strong
Competent
Grade:______________________
Weak
Unacceptable
The analysis opens with a satisfying,
accurate account of context/ background
information; all information is obviously
essential and relevant to the analysis that
follows.
The analysis opens with a basic accurate
account of context/ background
information; the introduction may be
slightly long or a little short but
information is obviously relevant.
The analysis opens with an incomplete,
inaccurate, or confusing account of
context/background information OR
opens with an introduction that is too long
(fails to emphasize most relevant
information)..
The analysis does not open with the
required context or background
information.
The analysis is thoughtfully organized by
clearly separated topics relevant to the
controversy; source material is smoothly
synthesized and integrated throughout;
there is no ineffective repetition of
content.
The analysis is organized by relevant
topics; source material is generally well
synthesized with only a few lapses;
ineffective repetition of content occurs to
a minor degree.
The analysis is not consistently organized
by topic; source material is often
awkwardly inserted; ineffective repetition
of content occurs frequently.
No effort is made to organize the analysis
by topics; source material is integrated in
a confusing manner throughout; repetition
and/or confusion interfere with
comprehension.
Body paragraphs provide convincing and
accurate responses to well-chosen
analytical questions: they consistently
draw on strong passages from texts to
illustrate and support claims; they clearly
and thoroughly explain reasoning and
relationships among passages; they
incorporate references to 8 or more
sources with each side (pro/con) evenly
represented
Body paragraphs provide accurate
responses to appropriate analytical
questions and consistently draw on
appropriate specific passages and features
within the texts to support claims OR they
provide a combination of convincing and
accurate responses to some questions and
less convincing or inaccurate responses to
others; they incorporate references to 6 or
7 sources with each side fairly
represented.
Effectively uses signal phrases for most
borrowed material; includes in-text and
end-of-text citations for all sources using
either MLA or APA style; omits some
minor information or contains minor
formatting errors
Body paragraphs provide generally weak
responses to analytical questions OR they
address an insufficient number of
questions; they incorporate references to
only 5 sources; bias is evident and/or
sides are unevenly represented
Body paragraphs are characterized by
confusing and underdeveloped support or
are altogether lacking in such support;
they incorporate references to fewer than
5 sources; one or both sides are unfairly
represented (paragarphs convey extreme
bias, lack of coverage).
Sporadic or confusing use of signal
phrases; includes full citations for only
some of the sources or consistently
includes incomplete citations; omits some
important information and/or contains
obvious formatting errors
Does not use signal phrases; fails to
include required citations; citations are
too brief or too confusing to be useful
Expression
Composes consistently clear, concise, and
graceful sentences; chooses words that are
consistently precise and idiomatic;
incorporates quotations smoothly, without
grammatical errors
Composes consistently clear sentences;
chooses words that are consistently
accurate and usually idiomatic;
incorporates quotations smoothly in most
cases and without grammatical errors
Composes sentences that are sometimes
confusing or excessively wordy;
occasionally misuses words or creates
phrases that are not idiomatic; handles
quotations awkwardly or creates
grammatical errors
Creates sentences that are frequently
confusing or excessively worded; misuses
words frequently; attempts to incorporate
quotations but results are confusing and
contain grammatical errors
Presentation &
Conventions of
Standard Written
English
Follows all manuscript guidelines.
Contains only a few (2 to 3) minor errors
in grammar, punctuation, and
mechanics—(e.g. misuse of the
apostrophe or an occasional misplaced
comma).
Minor errors in manuscript guidelines. A
larger number of minor errors (more than
3) or a small number (1 or 2) of major
errors in grammar, punctuation, and
mechanics (e.g. sentence boundary errors:
comma splices, fragments, fused
sentences, run-ons).
Has noticeable errors in manuscript
presentation. Contains a distracting
number of both minor and major errors in
grammar, punctuation, or mechanics.
Does not attempt to follow manuscript
guidelines. Contains errors in grammar,
punctuation, and mechanics that
frequently create confusion and cannot be
considered acceptable college-level work.
Introduction/Context
Body: Organization
Body: Development
Citations
Effectively uses signal phrases
throughout; includes full, accurately
formatted in-text and end-of-text citations
for all sources using either MLA or APA
style
Did you proofread your work?
Name:
Topic: The State of Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Focusing Question(s): Is the Supreme court decision in Environmental Protection Agency et
al v. Massachusetts, et al. a sound one?
Annotated Bibliography
1. Behan, Michelle. “Massachusetts v. EPA 549 U.S. 497 (2007).” Justia Law, 2017,
supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/549/497/.
•
Website editorial
•
The author is an attorney and editor for the Justia Law organization.
•
This is another relatively unbiased article that summons both parties to
evaluate their credits and disavows on policies and law related matters which
also brings and compares the reaction of the population to this, since they have
a part to take care of. And all results were compared.
•
Attitude, point of view, law
•
The author seems to have written this to advocate for the State of
Massachusetts.
•
Provides material for my “no” position in favor of the State of Massachusetts.
2. EPA Office of Public Affairs, 202-564-9828 ‘EPA Denies Petition to Regulate
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles.’ Unites States Environmental
Protection Agency
yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/fb36d84bf0a1390c8525701c005e4918/694c8f3b7
c16ff6085256d900065fdad!OpenDocument
•
Website editorial
•
EPA Newsroom; official editorial team
•
This is the newsroom for the EPA; listed in the article are the petition denial
set against them, issues arising, developments carried out by the body, various
governmental policies carried out against them by the governments and
various supports they give.
•
Attitude, style and tone, support
•
The author seems to be on a neutral ground but often, more support is given to
the EPA body.
•
Provides material for an arguable point on the opinion of the “yes” position in
favor of the EPA.
3. Heidy Abreu, Miguel Loza ‘Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (051120)’Legal Information Institute, law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/05-1120 29 Nov. 2006.
•
Website publication
•
Both authors are editors for the Legal Information Institute
•
Here both authors opened up the debates and shed light on both parties, issues
arising, facts to be know, issues and debates and supports for both parties.
•
Point of view, debate, discussion
•
A neutral ground on analyzing both parties
•
Scholarly source
4. John Wihbey. ‘Mr. Mass v. EPA: An Interview with the Man Who Put Climate
Change on America’s Legal Map.’ Yale Climate Connections,
yaleclimateconnections.org/2010/09/mr-mass-v-epa-an-interview-with-the-manwhoput-climate-change-on-americas-legal-map/
•
Website editorial
•
The author is a well known editor for the Yale Climate Connections
•
This article begins with a cruel interface and pointers on several governmental
bodies threatening to bring an end to the EPA body with several accusations.
Also attached is an extract of a transcript analyzing the soon to phasing out of
the EPA body by an associate justice in support of the state body. The
interview would have been a fierce one if it had included an attorney from the
other side as well; putting this in a debate scenario.
•
Victimization, style and tone, narrative, metaphors, attitude
•
The author seems to have written this to advocate for the State of
Massachusetts.
•
Provides material for an extremely biased opinion of the “no” position in favor
of the State of Massachusetts.
5. Justice
Stevens.
‘SUPREME
COURT
OF
THE
UNITED
STATES
MASSACHUSETTS, et al., PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
et al.’
Legal
Information
Institute,
law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-
1120.ZO.html. 2 April 2007.
•
Website publication
•
The author is editor for the Legal Information Institute
•
The author gave an in-depth ‘law’ description of the genesis of the situation
and how the government has been a part of the EPA. It further relates the basic
development that has been played by both parties, cons and pros for each
individual body and the situation at hand. This is a good timeline addressing
and can be used to trace the pathline of both parties and what influence they
both had taken part in.
•
Attitude, point of view, style and tone, debate, law
•
The author seems to have written this to advocate for the State of
Massachusetts.
•
Provides material for my “no” position in favor of the State of Massachusetts.
6. Levy, Pema. “Supremes’ Back Rules to Counter Climate Change.” Conservative
Justices Give the Government a Victory on Climate Change, Newsweek, 20 Feb.
2016.
•
Website editorial
•
The author is known to be a person who advocates against regulation of
greenhouse gases.
•
In this review, it was outlined on the various winning cases over the years, and
several regulations that were put in place to check government activities in
line with the clean air act policy. It weighs the money factor alongside with
this.
•
Attitude, point of view
•
The author seems to have written this to advocate for the State of
Massachusetts.
•
Provides material for my “no” position in favor of the State of Massachusetts.
7. Levitan, Ben (2017). The Tenth Anniversary of Massachusetts v. EPA. Retrieved
from http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2017/04/02/the-tenth-anniversary-ofmassachusetts-v-epa/
•
Website editorial
•
Outlines the precedents of the case and the argument made against the EPA;
10 years after. It throws more lights on the various counts of charges levied
against the Bush administration and illustrates valid reasons why the EPA
should have charge over the control. It goes further to elaborate the activities
and the progress of the EPA after the ruling; its several tremendous works by
list the differences in activities over the years. Even with all of this, the author
still addresses the issues with Scott Pruitt trying to evade his obligations
although it isn’t something to make a fuzz about. It gave a lot reference and
praise to the EPA though, this they deserve with the numerous dealings and
success achieved over the years.
•
Attitude, point of view.
•
In this article, the author is seemingly conservative with many liberal point of
views on controversial matters, although he may seem to be in the side of EPA
if well analyzed, but the point of view shared shows activities at both ends.
•
This will provide materials for my non biased analysis.
8. Lieberman, Ben. “The EPA’s Prudent Response to Massachusetts v. EPA.” The
Heritage
Foundation,
heritage.org/environment/report/the-epas-prudent-response-
massachusetts-v-epa.
•
Website editorial
•
The author is a former senior analyst in energy and environmental issues and an
editor for ‘The Heritage Foundation’
•
The editor tells a brief about the case, how it all started, and issues that brought
the manifestation of such, previous rulings, and cost management.
The author also draws a brief on previous government administration, bills
settings and how they seemed to have failed in implementing and setting things
right; that these body of government only serves to slow down the work process
and how the EPA should be applauded over numerous efforts and wills done. A
further delve into the article brings light to the causes and how all of these can
be amended for; showing how important the EPA are a solution to the issue.
•
Style and tone, narrative, victimization.
•
The author is conservative and seems to be in support of the EPA, basically this
is his selected field. He takes sides with EPA, this can be vividly seen in his use
of works and applauds for the body.
•
Provides material for an extremely biased opinion of the “yes” position in
favor of the EPA.
9. Linda Greenhouse. “Justices Say E.P.A. Has Power to Act on Harmful Gases.” The
New York Times, mobile.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/washington/03scotus.html.
•
Website editorial
•
The author is an editor for the New York Times.
•
This is an after-verdict prose that gives power to the EPA to regulate and control
heat trapping gasses in automobile emissions. It shows the various contributions
the EPA has done in enforcing the clean act policy, and how several
organizations have proposed in joining hands to effect several policy to further
this growth. Major supporting claims as to how EPA won were drawn and made
mentioned.
•
Point of view, support, victimization
•
The author seems to be on a neutral ground but often, more support is given to
the EPA body.
•
Provides material for an extremely biased opinion of the “yes” position in
favor of the EPA.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades