REQUIRED UNIT 1 FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS
Federalist No. 10: The Same Subject Continued—The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Federalist No. 10—Madison’s view was that the development of factions was an inevitable feature of society. Even though he was fearful of their potential, he did not make the argument that they should be abolished. He believed the separation of powers of the three branches of government, and the division of government between the national and local governments would, in the end, provide enough government protection and regulation of these interests. In addition, the formation of political parties became an additional balance to the formation of private interest groups, many of which were economically based during the early stages of our country’s existence.
Brutus No. 1: To the Citizens of New York
Brutus No. 1 starts a series of essays written by Anti-Federalists including Robert Yates, Patrick Henry, and John DeWitt. The first essay makes an argument against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution by New York. He was afraid the new government would become despotic and take away people’s liberty. The paper argued for a written Bill of Rights to be included in the Constitution. Brutus also argues that the three branches of government were too powerful.
Declaration of Independence
Big Idea: Constitutionalism
The Declaration of Independence became the path and rationale for American independence from Great Britain:
■ THE PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS—Using Locke’s philosophy, the Declaration of Independence establishes “unalienable rights” as the cornerstone of natural rights. As a consequence of these rights, limited governments are formed receiving their powers from “the consent of the governed.”
■ THE GRIEVANCES—In a lawyerlike dissertation, the second part of the Declaration of Independence makes the case against Great Britain. Taxation without representation, unjust trials, quartering of British soldiers, abolition of colonial assemblies, and a policy of mercantilism created a logic for drastic change.
■ THE STATEMENT OF SEPARATION—Announcing to the world that the colonists had no choice but to revolt, Jefferson stated that it is not only the right, but the duty of the colonists to change the government.
The Articles of Confederation
Big Idea: Constitutionalism
Under the Articles of Confederation, the national government had two levels of government—a weak national government with a one-house Congress and dominant state governments. Congress was given limited power to declare war, make peace, and sign treaties. The national government could borrow money, but it had no power to tax the individual states. The Articles of Confederation created a national army and navy, but the government had no power to draft soldiers. There was no chief executive or national court system, and legislation had to be passed by a two-thirds majority. The states could create economic havoc by imposing tariffs on each other, by creating their own currency in addition to the national currency, by refusing to amend the Articles of Confederation (an amendment needed unanimous approval by the states), and by refusing to recognize treaties made by the national government.
The Constitution of the United States
Big Ideas: Constitutionalism, Competing Policy-Making Interests
From the clarity of purpose in the Preamble, to the organization and structure of the three branches of government, to the amending process, the Constitution provides for orderly and effective government.
The major characteristics of the Constitution include:
■ the separation of powers of each branch of government;
■ checks and balances including a recognition that a simple majority vote may not be enough of a check;
■ a built-in elastic clause as part of Congress’s power;
■ a reserved power clause giving states power not delegated to the national government;
■ rights guaranteed to the citizens;
■ an impeachment clause that guarantees the president does not break the oath of office;
■ precedents and traditions creating an unwritten constitution;
■ judicial review growing out of an interpretation of the power of the Supreme Court;
■ an amending process, which is flexible enough to allow for change even though it involves more than a majority vote; and
■ the inherent powers of the president.
The Bill of Rights
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
The rights of the citizens are clearly outlined in the Bill of Rights as is the ability of the people to exercise the right to vote. Limits are placed on both the federal government and the state governments. The Bill of Rights represents a basic definition of a person’s civil liberties—those rights of the people that the government cannot take away. They are guaranteed in the Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, in other amendments passed, as well as through court interpretation. These rights are characterized as substantive, the kind of limits placed on the national government (like the First, Second, and Eighth Amendments) and procedural, outlining how the government is supposed to treat individuals (for instance the Fifth Amendment). Civil liberties differ from civil rights. Civil liberties protect individuals from abuses of the government, whereas civil rights come about as a result of the equal protection under the law.
Federalist No. 51—The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments
Big Idea: Competing Policy-Making Interests
Madison writes Federalist No. 51 to lay out the reasons for three separate independent branches of government. This structure would ensure that people would have their liberty. Madison preferred that each branch be elected by the people but realized that the judicial branch had special qualifications making that impossible. Madison also argued that checks and balances would prevent any one branch of government from becoming too strong.
Unit 2
Federalist No. 70—The Presidency Has Been Enhanced Beyond Its Expressed Constitutional Powers
Big Idea: Constitutionalism
Federalist No. 70 is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton arguing for a single president provided for in the United States Constitution. According to Hamilton, a single president is necessary to ensure accountability in government, to enable the president to defend against legislative encroachments on his power, and to ensure “energy” in the executive.
Federalist No. 78—The Judiciary
Big Idea: Constitutionalism
Federalist No. 78 was written by Hamilton to explain and justify the structure of the judiciary under the proposed Constitution of the United States arguing the need for an independent judiciary, justices appointed for life, and the judicial power to declare laws unconstitutional. Having life tenure would free justices from political pressures and enable them to act independently. Hamilton also saw the courts as the arbiter between the executive and legislative branches. He felt the judiciary would be able to protect the liberty interests of the people and would be the weakest branch of government.
Unit 3
Letter from Birmingham Jail
Big Idea: Civic Participation in a Representative Democracy
The Letter from Birmingham Jail, also known as the Letter from Birmingham City Jail and The Negro Is Your Brother, is an open letter written on April 16, 1963, by Martin Luther King Jr. The letter defends the strategy of nonviolent resistance to racism. It says that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws and to take direct action rather than waiting, potentially forever, for justice to come through the courts.
Unit 1
McCulloch v Maryland (1819)
Big Idea: Constitutionalism (Federalism)
The issue revolved around the right of Maryland to tax paper currency needed by a branch of the U.S. National Bank located in that state. The bank was established by Congress using the elastic clause of the Constitution. In one of a series of landmark decisions, the Supreme Court, under the leadership of John Marshall, ruled unanimously that the “power to tax involves the power to destroy.” The court so reasoned because the United States had the right to coin and regulate money and had the right to set up the National Bank to do this under the “necessary and proper” clause. After the bank was created, the laws protecting it were supreme; therefore, Maryland could not tax the federal bank.
United States v Lopez (1995)
Big Idea: Constitutionalism (Federalism)
In 1990, Congress passed the Gun-Free School Zones Act, which made the possession of a gun within a thousand yards of a school a federal crime. The issue was whether Congress overstepped its Commerce Authority in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court held that enforcement of such an act comes under the authority of the states.
Unit 2
Marbury v Madison (1803)
Big Idea: Constitutionalism (The Judiciary)
William Marbury was denied a presidential appointment, made by outgoing President John Adams and confirmed by the Senate, because James Madison, secretary of state to the new president, Thomas Jefferson, refused to deliver the appointment to him. The issue was: Can the Supreme Court declare a legislative act, the Judiciary Act of 1789, unconstitutional because of its requirement to bring the case to the Supreme Court using the original jurisdiction doctrine? The landmark decision established the principle of judicial review.
Baker v Carr (1962)
Big Idea: Constitutionalism (Structure of Legislative Branch)
Charles Baker challenged Tennessee’s apportionment law claiming that when reapportionment was done by the state legislature it did not take into account population shifts, and it favored rural areas. The issue was whether federal courts can decide the political issue of state apportionment procedures. This decision created guidelines for drawing up congressional districts and guaranteed a more equitable system of representation to the citizens of each state. The court reformulated the political question doctrine of whether districts were apportioned for political reasons coming up with the doctrine of “one person, one vote.”
Shaw v Reno (1993)
Big Idea: Constitutionalism (Structure of Legislative Branch)
After North Carolina created three majority-minority districts when the U.S. Attorney General sued the state for creating one district that was gerrymandered, ensuring that a black candidate would win, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was used to challenge how the districts were created. The issue was whether the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment mandated that legislative redistricting must use race as one of the factors to ensure minority representation. In a 5–4 decision the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s description of the shape of the new district as “bizarre” and said such a district “bears an uncomfortable resemblance to political apartheid.”
UNIT 3
Schenck v United States (1919)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Schenck continued to print, distribute material, and speak against U.S. efforts in World War I. He was tried and convicted for violating the Espionage Act.
Constitutional issue: Did the government have the right to censor material in a time of national emergency? In a unanimous decision: Justice Holmes ruled for the majority that Schenck did not have the right to print, speak, and distribute material against U.S. efforts in World War I because a “clear and present danger” existed.
Brown v Board of Education (1954)
Big Idea: Civil Participation in a Representative Democracy
Brown was forced to attend segregated schools the state claimed were “separate but equal.” The constitutional issue was whether the state violated Brown’s equal protection as established in the Fourteenth Amendment. In a unanimous decision, the Court found that race-based segregation violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and ordered schools to be integrated.
Engel v Vitale (1962)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Students in a public high school refused to recite a nondenominational (not connected to any religion) prayer that started with the words “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee.” The issue was whether the establishment clause of the First Amendment was violated by New York State because it made the recitation of this prayer mandatory? The majority decision ruled that the prayer was unconstitutional and violated the establishment clause.
Gideon v Wainright (1963)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Earl Gideon was refused the right to have an attorney after he robbed a pool hall. He was subsequently put on trial and had to defend himself. The constitutional issue was Gideon being denied his Sixth Amendment right to have an attorney represent him. In a unanimous decision the court established that the accused has the right to an attorney even if he or she cannot afford one.
Tinker v Des Moines (1969)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Essential Fact: Students were suspended after being warned not to wear black armbands as a symbol of protest against the Vietnam War. The constitutional issue: Were the students’ First Amendment free-speech rights violated by the school district for protesting using symbolic speech? This decision established that students’ rights are “not shed at the schoolhouse gates” and defined the students’ wearing a black armband in silent protest of the Vietnam War as “a legitimate form of symbolic speech.”
New York Times Company v United States (1971)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
The New York Times printed the Pentagon Papers, a secret study of the Vietnam War, and the U.S. government attempted to halt its publication, claiming it would hurt the national security of the United States. The constitutional issue was whether the New York Times was protected by the First Amendment’s free-press clause even in the case where the government declares the material essential to national security. The Supreme Court ruled that the government did not have the right to prevent the New York Times from printing information about the history of the country’s involvement in the Vietnam War.
Wisconsin v Yoder (1972)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
The state of Wisconsin had a law that mandated school attendance for everybody past the eighth grade. Amish students refused to attend high school after finishing the eighth grade. The constitutional issue was whether the state law violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment? In a unanimous decision the Supreme Court ruled that a state could not force Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade because it violated the free exercise clause.
Roe v Wade (1973)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
Petitioner “Roe” wanted to terminate her pregnancy by having an abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except in a case where a mother’s life is in danger. The constitutional issue was: Did a right to privacy established in a prior Supreme Court case and protected by and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment give Roe the right to an abortion? The majority decision used the concept of being “secure in their persons”—the Supreme Court ruled that abortions are constitutionally protected. It set up a trimester system allowing unrestricted abortions in the first trimester but regulated abortions during the second trimester and allowed the states to ban abortion during the third trimester unless the mother’s or baby’s life was endangered.
McDonald v Chicago (2010)
Big Idea: Liberty and Order
The City of Chicago maintained its gun-control laws after the Supreme Court ruled in Heller that the Second Amendment gave an individual the right to bear arms. The constitutional issue was whether Chicago had violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s due-process clause. The court’s decision upholding an individual’s right to bear arms cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.
Unit 5
Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (2010)
Big Idea: Civic Participation in a Representative Democracy
Citizens United is a conservative 501(c)4 non-profit organization in the United States that challenged the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Finance Act decision to prevent the group from financing a negative movie about Hillary Clinton. The constitutional issue was whether the Supreme Court’s previous rulings and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Finance Act apply to nonprofit organizations or are those organizations protected by the First Amendment free-speech clause in relation to supporting political issues? The majority decision changed the entire manner in which campaign laws were able to raise funds.