PLAP 3500

I absolutely loved this course and would recommend it to anyone vaguely interested in the Supreme Court the judiciary. Rivero is a very friendly and organized professor who made the most of every lecture. He has a large knowledge base of the Supreme Court and would often include fun facts about the justices and additional background information that made the cases more complex and interesting. Merwa Koyash was also a compassionate and fair TA. The class was lecture-based with weekly discussion posts based on readings, which were graded for completion. The readings were usually light and fairly interesting, and Professor Rivero often made sure to give abbreviated Opinions so that we only read what was necessary. The major assignments were two short essays (5-6) pages and a final, in person, exam. I thought everything was fairly graded, and if you paid attention in class, you would likely do well on all of the assignments.

This class is amazing. I went in knowing a fair amount about the judiciary and wanting to strengthen that knowledge, but with no intentions of pursuing any study of it down the road. After this course, Prof Rivero has me considering law school. This course is a tremendous history of the Supreme Court, and Rivero is an excellent professor with a clear passion for the subject. The readings and lecture material are incredibly interesting; most of the course is spent covering various cases from the history of the Supreme Court, from the well-known to more obscure ones. The two short papers (5-6 pages) written throughout the semester were written without any research, which made us really grapple with the course material, but were very fun to work on. They were graded very fairly, as was the final exam, which was a good summary of the course. While discussion never produced any big insights, there was always plenty of energy; the material is very easy to engage with and yet is so complex and meaningful that there are bound to be so many different interpretations. It's a very good class to develop political thinking skills, and you get a nice dose of history in it too. I could not recommend this class enough: one of my favorites at UVA!

Albert is young and teaching for the first time, so there were some expected growing pains– I found lectures relatively boring, but still important to follow since lots of the info in lectures wasn't in readings (which are basically just Supreme Court cases). We went from Marbury v. Madison up thru modern cases (Dobbs, Rahimi, etc) in units covering the founding of SCOTUS, Civil Rights + Civil Liberties (econ regulations, Cold War stuff, race) and Modern Controversies (abortion, gun rights mainly). The class moved pretty slow imo and wasn't much more in depth than my high school Con Law class but wasn't super hard. Get Merwa as you TA if she's still doing it because she was AWESOME. Main components of grade are 2 papers and a final, and the papers are really easy and straightforward. Solid class if you want to do politics but definitely won't blow your mind– probably will get better with time as he refines the curriculum.

I really enjoyed this class! It can be intimidating being a first year taking a 3000s level class, however, I would recommend it (assuming the course stays the same since it is a special topic) to anyone in any year. Professor Rivero is an extremely kind person and an amazing lecturer and the class isn’t that challenging. Your grade consists of just 2 papers, a final, and discussion. He doesn’t make discussion a burden, and he’s always willing to help answer questions about papers and makes himself more available during office hours for those wanting to ask questions about the final. The final itself is not that tricky at all, if you come to lecture, pay attention, and take good notes, you’ll do great! The readings are also not that bad, you read abridged versions of Supreme Court cases, and during lecture, the main points are summarized and Prof Rivero talks about the context for the cases (like why did they come out the way they did) and the impact of them. Definitely do the readings as they’ll help on the paper, but really if you put in a very reasonable amount of effort, you’ll do great! This class is amazing and I learned so much.

This course was super cool, especially if you're pre-law or just want to learn more about how the legal system works. A lot of the content was based on historical Supreme Court cases, but it was interesting to see how much precedent matters. Rivero is super knowledgeable and passionate about what he teaches, which makes the lectures more engaging. The class is mostly lecture-based. He usually walks through a specific case, talks about the background, why it matters, the justices’ opinions, and then connects it to a bigger theme. You do have readings, but it’s mainly just reading the cases and maybe a couple of important articles. I mostly used Oyez for the cases and got by just fine—plus, he tells you exactly what you need to know in lecture. That said, lectures can get VERY dry at times because it's a lot of info thrown at you fast. Still, going to the lecture is super important. Try to find someone to compare notes with because he moves fast, and you might miss stuff.

I also took it the year he switched to exams, and honestly, it wasn’t the best change. We had two midterms and a final, with multiple choice and short answers or essays. The structure didn’t reflect what we’d learned, and the MCQs were super confusing and tripped you up. The final mostly covered Unit 3 (each midterm covered Units 1 and 2, respectively), but it was still a lot—you had to remember every justice’s name, their opinions, quotes, legal jargon, everything. You also get a measly 3 x 5 notecard, which is helpful, but it is not enough for the intense amount of content. Rivero also kind of makes up lectures on the spot sometimes, so the main takeaways weren’t always clear.

His office hours are super helpful, though—he’ll explain anything you’re confused about and wants you to do well. Definitely go to him if you need help. I had Ben as my TA. He was super nice and a fair grader, but the discussion was kind of boring. It felt like he didn’t really add much beyond what Rivero already said in lecture, so it wasn’t that helpful. He also just sat there and was like “what questions do you have” before he goes on a long tangent about the topic.

Professor Rivero is incredibly kind and an engaging lecturer. That said, the course didn’t fully align with my expectations based on the description. I had hoped to explore the historical context that explains how the Supreme Court has evolved into what it is today. Instead, the course primarily focused on basic historical developments. Contemporary relevance wasn’t really addressed until the final week, and even then, it was difficult to meaningfully connect the past to present-day challenges.

This semester (Spring 2025) was the first time the course adopted a new format: two midterms and a final, rather than the previous two-essays-and-final structure. The initial grading breakdown was 15% discussion participation, 25% for each midterm, and 35% for the final. However, after both midterms, it was announced that if your participation grade was higher than one of your midterms, participation would count for 20% and the lower midterm would drop to 20%. This adjustment was made after many students struggled with the first midterm, although the second midterm saw a median of A-.

Each midterm was composed of 60% multiple choice and 40% a short essay. The essay questions were fair - if you reviewed the material and paid attention to the connections Professor Rivero emphasized in his slides, you were in good shape. The multiple choice questions, however, were very challenging: often overly specific, with answer choices so similar that even a strong understanding of the material didn’t guarantee the right answer.

The final exam followed a slightly different format: multiple choice questions, two short paragraph responses, and one short essay - so the weight of the multiple choice section was reduced compared to the midterms.

One of the highlights of the course was my TA, Benjamin Bottger - hands down the best TA I’ve ever had. He was incredibly supportive, clear, and graded the essay sections fairly. If you have the opportunity to be in his section, I highly recommend it.

Overall, I enjoyed the course. But if you want to do well, be prepared to put in serious work - especially to master the tricky multiple choice sections. If you’re interested in the Supreme Court and ready to engage deeply with the material (and ideally have a great TA), I would recommend this class. Just know that the exams are definitely not easy.